Main menu

Jorge, the Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation, Has Spoken--and Said Nothing

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has ended his latest smoke and mirrors show in the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River. Unlike the likable charlatan played by Frank Morgan in that truly detestable motion picture that brought the theosophist L. Frank Baum’s The Wizard of Oz to the “big screen” eighty years ago this year Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a thoroughly detestable charlatan who uses smoke and mirrors to try fool Catholics and non-Catholics alike even after the Totos have pulled the curtain away from the booth in which he has been orchestrating the smoke and mirrors.

Follow this for a few moments, please.

The Wizard of Oz motion picture was a mockery of the Catholic Faith as the whole point of Toto’s pulling the curtain away from the “Wizard of Oz’s” booth was to demonstrate that there is no God and that religion is a sham. The Emerald City is as illusory as Heaven, and the final “Emerald City” scene before Dorothy clicks her ruby red slippers three times and goes back to Kansas (where she has been asleep after getting knocked unconscious during a tornado) shows the Wizard “commissioning” the Scarecrow, the Tinman and the Cowardly Lion to rule in his absence is a mockery of Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ’s commissioning of the Apostles prior to His Ascension to His Co-Equal, Co-Eternal God the Father’s right hand in glory. Indeed, the “Wizard’s ascent in the balloon is itself a mockery of the Ascension.

In like manner, therefore, the false religion of conciliarism is itself a mockery of Catholic Faith, Morals, and Worship, and it has been bamboozling ordinary Catholics with its own smoke and mirrors figuratively—and sometimes quite literally in some of the sacrilegious liturgical and paraliturgical performances that have been staged in churches in the control of the conciliar revolutionaries—for over sixty years now. The conciliar medicine and dog and pony shows are based in one condemned Modernist precept after another, and only those who are intellectually dishonest or who choose to blind themselves to reality can state that this is not true.

As noted ten days ago in Remove and Replace? You Are Still Left with the Same False Church, it should be eminently clear by now that the counterfeit church of conciliarism is not the Catholic Church, she who is the spotless, mystical bride of her Divine Founder, Mystical Spouse and Invisible Head, Our Lord Jesus Christ. The Catholic Church can never be stained by any kind of error. Why do so many people act as though this is the case or, perhaps worse yet, keep redefining the miniscule amount of “official teaching” to which Catholics are obliged to give their assent to one they consider to be a true and legitimate Successor of Saint Peter and his true bishops? Truth must be our sole guide in these times, not the intellectually dishonesty found in publications of the Society of Saint Pius X such as A Little Catechism on Sedevacantism that was eviscerated recently by a Catholic in Ireland (see The Deception in the SSPX's Anti-Sedevacantism "Catechism"). Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a fraud. So is the false religion that he professes. He is truly the “Wizard of Modernism.”

The Wizard of Modernism does not understand, however, that almost everyone has caught on to his own personal schtick of speaking boldly but doing nothing as he both ignores the simple fact that the systematic recruitment, retention, promotion and protection of sodomites into the conciliar presbyterate and hierarchy is at the root cause of all clerical abuse, whether directed at minors or adults, and as he wants us to ignore the fact that he himself has covered-up for clerical abusers and provides some of them with shelter in the Casa Santa Marta as well as creating what amounts to “make work” jobs for them inside the Walls of the Occupied Vatican. His curtain has been pulled back and only his selected coterie of fellow lavender enablers and/or sodomites in his conciliar “hierarchy” actually believe that the schtick has any credibility. Then again, there are none so blind as they who refuse to see.

Consider the fact that “Pope Francis’s” remarks at the end of the meaningless exercise in conciliarspeak tomfoolery that took place last week included stern-sounding words that were devoid of anything other than nebulous “promises” that are devoid of any real meaning. Although it pains me to have to undertake this exercise yet again, the work that I believe God desires to me to compels me to review the remarks that Jorge Mario Bergoglio made on Sunday, February 24, 2019, Sexagesima, after the conclusion of a "concelebrated" staging of the Protestant and Judeo-Masonic liturgical service, with a bit of care. As per usual, I will provide excerpts from Bergoglio’s propaganda before providing my own comments after each one:

Dear Brothers and Sisters,

As I thank the Lord who has accompanied us during these days, I would like to thank all of you for the ecclesial spirit and concrete commitment that you have so generously demonstrated.

Our work has made us realize once again that the gravity of the scourge of the sexual abuse of minors is, and historically has been, a widespread phenomenon in all cultures and societies. Only in relatively recent times has it become the subject of systematic research, thanks to changes in public opinion regarding a problem that was previously considered taboo; everyone knew of its presence yet no one spoke of it. I am reminded too of the cruel religious practice, once widespread in certain cultures, of sacrificing human beings – frequently children – in pagan rites. Yet even today, the statistics available on the sexual abuse of minors drawn up by various national and international organizations and agencies (the WHO, UNICEF, INTERPOL, EUROPOL and others) do not represent the real extent of the phenomenon, which is often underestimated, mainly because many cases of the sexual abuse of minors go unreported,[1] particularly the great number committed within families. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number One:

Notice how the leader of the One World Ecumenical Religion presages conciliarism’s self-made problem of clerical abuse by making reference to the global carnal exploitation of children as gleaned from statistics provided by anti-life, anti-family world governance bureaucracies such as the World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund for Children. This is truly inexcusable as both the World Health Organization and the United Nations Children’s Fund support and promote the very evils—contraception, the surgical execution of the innocent preborn and sodomy—that, proximately speaking, have given rise to the global misuse of the gift that God has given human beings for the continuation of the species to gratify themselves at any time with any person regardless of gender or age. I want to document this statement with meticulous care.

The United Nations Children’s Fund, which was called the United Nations International Children’s Emergency Fund until 1953, has been in the forefront of indoctrinating children in to the ways of impurity and indecency, up to and including the “choice” of their “orientation” by which they can “identify” themselves and thus “decide” how to gratify themselves by violating the binding precepts of the Sixth and Ninth Commandments in a variety of degrading, perverse ways that robs them of their innocence and makes them ready prey for carnal exploitation and to became slaves of sin if not actual slaves of human traffickers:

I am writing from the United Nations where right now all the governments of the world are fighting at the UN Commission on the Status of Women (CSW) in New York over a seemingly simple term—something called “comprehensive sexuality education” (CSE).

Tomorrow morning at 8:30 a.m., Family Watch, along with some of our partners, is taking on UNICEF for sexualizing children worldwide through their support of CSE. We are doing this to expose how the radical CSE agenda is harming children and to prevent CSE from being adopted at the UN this week.

We have organized a bold demonstration for tomorrow right outside UNICEF headquarters directly across from the United Nations.

This is not something we normally do, but something drastic has to be done to stop this deceptive assault on children.

CSE is the number one tool used to promote abortion and radical sexual “rights” for children. For example, IPAS, the largest manufacturer of a handheld abortion kit, is hosting an event at CSW called, “Without Abortion, it’s not “Comprehensive Sexuality Education.”

CSE is at the heart of the abortion movement as it refers children to abortion clinics including Planned Parenthood and trains children to become abortion advocates.

We have also found shocking information showing how CSE (backed by multiple UN agencies in partnership with Planned Parenthood) is used to undermine parental rights and promote, among other things, abortion rights, promiscuity, and transgender ideology.

All of this is clearly documented at StopCSE.org. We strongly encourage everyone to go there, look at the evidence, and sign the petition.

The more people who sign the petition, the more people we will be representing as we demonstrate against CSE and work to expose UNICEF’s agenda and lobby government leaders from around the world who are here this week.

We even found a document showing how UNICEF is trying to abolish parental rights so that children can consent to medical procedures and “sexual and reproductive health services” (a euphemism for abortion, contraception, and even transgender hormone therapy and surgeries) without their parents’ knowledge or consent. (See more at StopCSE.org.)

Did you know that as far back as 1999, UNICEF even published a “sexual and reproductive health” manual telling adolescents they can get sexual pleasure with animals or non-consenting persons? Hard to believe, I know, but we have a link to pages from that old manual (I have the full copy in my office) along with other current manuals and guidelines.

Shame on UNICEF!

UNICEF, the agency charged with protecting the world’s children, has this underlying insidious agenda that has to be stopped. Is everyone at UNICEF bad or is everything they do harmful? No. Do they do some good things for children in the world? Yes. But that does not excuse what they are doing to sexualize and harm children. This must be rooted out or all support for UNICEF must cease and be redirected to other reputable child-serving organizations and efforts.

UNICEF is not the only UN agency that works to sexualize children. It is joined by UNFPA, UN Women, UN AIDS, and the World Health Organization. These agencies partner with Planned Parenthood to promote these harmful programs.

We are pleased to announce that the American College of Pediatricians, a reputable organization that calls comprehensive sexuality education “a dangerous assault on the health and innocence of children,” is cosponsoring this demonstration along with the UN Family Rights Caucus, the Foundation for African Cultural Heritage (Nigeria), the Protect Child Health Coalition, Parents Rights in Education, The Child Protection Institute, UYIRKKURAL (India), Expose Sex Ed Now, CitizenGo, The Salt & Light Council, Canada Silent No More, the American Association of Pro-Life Obstetricians and Gynecologists, the Center for Family and Human Rights (C-FAM), and Feminina Europa. If your organization would like to cosponsor this protest click here.

We will have demonstrators with us who have come to the UN all the way from France, Nigeria, India, Mexico, Kenya, Hungary, Slovakia, Canada, the UK, and more. (Demand UNICEF Stop Sexaulizing Children.)

Mind you, this “alert,” which was posted on March 19, 2018, the Feast of Saint Joseph, only scratched the surface of the evils done by the United Nations Children’s Fund. Indeed, the evil done by this monstrous organization goes back decades, something that was documented in a report from the 1990s that was posted to the website of the Eternally Wishful Television Network (EWTN):

The United Nation's Children's Fund (UNICEF) claims to represent the needs of children throughout the world. It claims to prioritize a "first call" for children's access to world resources in every nation. It claims, through its Convention on the Rights of the Child, to have formulated a program that will help guarantee well-being and respect for all children.

Such claims form a false face masking a cynical program that uses children to prevent other children from being born. UNICEF'S record reveals that it is not a champion of children or family values. Throughout the world, UNICEF promotes population control programs which advocate abortion and utilize bookjuggling antics to fund abortifacients and sterilizations.

If it's true that we're known by the company we keep, UNICEF may be better understood by examining some of its insidious collaborations.

UNICEF Collaborates

An "interagency partnership" composed of the United Nations Children's Fund (UNICEF), the World Bank, the United Nations Development Programme (UNDP), the World Health Organization (WHO), the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF) and the Population Council (PC) have proposed a "Safe Motherhood Initiative" centered on the legalization of abortion within all public and private maternal and health programs in developing countries. Within the partnership, the World Bank is intended to provide the economic compulsion and guaranteed funds necessary to carry out the agenda.

UNICEF Promotes Population Control

UNICEF networks are a major conduit for abortion pressures and for abortifacient drugs, devices and sterilizations promoted by the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), the World Health Organization (WHO), the World Bank (the Bank) and the International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF).

UNFPA has been denied funding by the United States Congress because of UNFPA's involvement in directing and managing the coerced abortion and sterilization program in China. Both UNFPA and IPPF are noted for their abortion advocacy and activity. IPPF has illegally supplied vacuum aspiration kits for abortions to the Philippines, Bangladesh, Korea, Singapore, Hong Kong, Vietnam and India. Yet UNICEF has provided funds for both organizations ("The Hastings Center Report," Vol.10, No.2, April, 1980).

The lack of access to alternative health care options in developing nations, combined with the politicized propaganda and health-destroying technologies of international population control idealogues, strongly impacts on patients' abilities to give informed consent in UNICEF maternal and Child Health Care (MCH) settings.

UNICEF's Pornographic Sex Education

UNICEF uses pornographic sex education programs. The programs were purchased from the Japanese Organization for International Cooperation in Family Planning (JOICFP) to "educate" children. The films, produced by JOICFP and MEXFAM, the Mexican IPPF affiliate, are titled "The Blue Pigeon" and "Music For Two.”

The "Blue Pigeon" is a cartoon targeted at 10 and 12-year-old children which graphically depicts sexual intercourse between two children attending a children's picnic.

"Music for Two" depicts a young girl who imagines herself married. In her fantasy she sees an image of a tired, overworked and overburdened, pregnant woman with several children. Her husband is shown as indifferent and uninterested in either his wife or the children. The negative message is that, in marriage, women become nothing more than breeders and slaves. As the girl acts out her sexual fantasies with a young boy in her neighborhood they engage in graphically depicted sexual intercourse after outfitting each other with birth control devices. At the end of the film, the girl skips off happily, having had commitment-free intercourse without the prospect of a burdensome marriage (Patricia Poppe, Luis Maria Aller Atucha, "Integrated Project and IEC Materials in Guatemala and Mexico, " JOICFP).

U.N. Rights of the Child? Wrong!!

Within the language of The U.N. Convention on the Rights of the Child promulgated by UNICEF, parental rights and responsibilities become subject to government determination while children are separated from parents and families as individuals with separate rights which cannot be abridged.

Included among the rights which may not be denied to children is the right to health care which incorporates rights to contraceptive services; the right to privacy, which has been responsible for the deaths of over 25 million children in the United States alone; the right to express their views and to have their views given 'due weight'; and the right to seek, receive and impart information and ideas of all kinds, regardless of frontiers, either orally, in writing or in print, in the form of art or through any other media of the child's choice.

UNICEF'S False Denials

UNICEF denies that it advances any advocacy of particular family planning methods or abortion. It denies that it funds contraceptive supplies and sterilization programs. In fact, the public record shows that UNICEF, just as it claims, "does not advocate any particular view on the choice of the

UNICEF boldly predicts that the number of children being born into the world will 'peak" and then "decline" in the late 1990s. (UNICEF; The State of the World's Children, 1990, 4). It is UNICEF's stated intention to produce pressures to bring this about, as the following examples illustrate:

World Population Conference in 1974: WHO, supported by UNICEF, worked to establish a public policy "link between health care and family planning" (Maggie Black, "The Children and the Nations, The Story of UNICEF," 257)

Henry Labouisse, UNICEF's executive director speaking at that conference: ". . . national policies in the population field must be translated into specific measures that directly touch the lives of individual families" (Ibid.).

James Grant, the present UNICEF executive director: "The central issue of our time may well turn out to be how the world addresses the problem of ever-expanding human numbers" ("National Concord," Friday, Jan. 18, 1991).

UNICEF and WHO cooperation: ". . . in creation of population awareness for policy makers and opinion leaders...." This cooperation has included "contraceptive prevalence and fertility preference." Population control pressures and methodologies were also integrated into sanitation, parasite control and nutrition programs (1987 Report by the Executive Director of UNFPA).

Commitment to Population Control

Jamaica: UNICEF received $720,684 in UNFPA funds for the purchase of contraceptives for the National Family Planning Program ("UNFPA Inventory of Population Projects in Developing Countries Around the World," 1987/88, 281).

Kenya: UNICEF received $700,000 from the World Bank for a Population Project which established an interagency information and education program for the promotion of a small family norm; and provided funds for the establishment of 300 new Maternal and Child Health Family Planning (MCH/FP) units and an additional 300 Health Centres to be operated by the Ministry of Health. "In order to increase the project's impact on fertility, the project was amended in 1985 to include surgical contraceptive (sterilization) facilities in 13 district hospitals and family planning clinics" (292).

Malawi: UNICEF received $1.8 million from the World Bank to participate in a "Family Health Project." The family health components included MCH services, primary health care, child spacing and nutrition. In addition, the project would assist in the development of surgical contraception services (sterilization) and expansion of urban and rural family health services by training of staff, traditional birth and village health attendants. The population increase would be slowed through an increase in women using modern contraceptive methods (333).

Nepal: UNICEF received $795,569 from UNFPA to participate in a joint project to support FP/MCH activities; provide selected contraceptives; and organize, expand and improve the quality of sterilization in mobile units country-wide and in regular health institutions in non-integrated districts (395).

Bangladesh: UNFPA provided $5,453,023 to UNICEF to "provide support to the integrated maternal and child health/family planning services and to the Population Control and Family Planning Division. ("Inventory of Population Projects in Developing Countries Around the World," 1988/1989, 28).

Burundi: World Bank funds in the amount of $1.8 million were given to UNICEF for the purpose of engaging in a Population and Health Project "to improve maternal and child health status" by strengthening MCH/FP services and nutrition and "to increase contraceptive prevalence to 14 percent by 1992" (86).

UNICEF/Kenya, UNICEF/United Republic of Tanzania and UNICEF/Uganda distributed a primary school education magazine, Pied Crow Environmental Special Magazine. The publication is a seven issue series on awareness of population growth for primary school children ("UNFPA Inventory of Population Projects in Developing Countries Around the World" 1989/1990 296).

Malaysia: UNICEF participated as executing agent in a $6.5 million UNFPA Project to consolidate current population programs and further integrate family planning with other family development programs (331).

UNICEF denies its complicity by crying, "clean hands, clean hands!" while slyly using World Bank and UNFPA population control money to fund the clinics, stock the shelves, train the midwives and village health workers and pay for vans used by those who tour the countryside of developing nations sterilizing the people.

The public record provides a clear chronicle of UNICEF'S operations which fund abortion advocacy, abortifacient/contraceptive supplies and sterilization.

These facts were established over twenty-five years ago now, and Jorge Mario Bergoglio, a “true believer” in the accuracy and infallibility of organizations that are committed to the destruction of purity and thus of all social order, lends them credibility by citing their statistics to prove the existence of a problem that they have help to create, foster and institutionalize globally. Talk about doing the work of the devil.

Despite all protestations to the contrary, the United Nations Children’s Fund is one the world’s foremost promoters of the chemical and surgical execution of the innocent preborn, something that a report from ten years ago documented:

The United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF) claims to be neutral on the issue of abortion. However, in a cooperative effort by UNICEF, United Nations Population Fund (UNFPA), World Health Organization (WHO) and World Bank a 393-page guide was produced on “Integrated Management of Pregnancy and Childbirth.” Within the document, detail is given on UNICEF’s preferred method of abortion: Manual Vacuum Aspiration (MVA).

“The preferred method of evacuation of the uterus is by manual vacuum aspiration. Dilatation and curettage should be used only if manual aspiration is not available.” 1

Specifics are then given on how to perform a dilatation and curettage abortion and an abortion using the MVA method. 2

UNICEF writes concerning the types of abortions and directions are even given on the administration of misoprostol – the first pill in the deadly combination of the abortion drug RU 486.

Women are to take the “misoprostol 400 mcg by mouth (repeat once after four hours if necessary); Arrange for evacuation of uterus [MVA] as soon as possible.” 3

Durbin Clinical Sales of the UK is utilizing UNICEF’s joint document as an endorsement of abortion methods to sell equipment for killing babies.

“Manual Vacuum Aspiration (MVA) is a simple and effective method for uterine evacuation. The procedure is 99% effective, with lower complication rates than D&C, quick to perform, gentle and patient-friendly. A joint publication by WHO, UNFPA, UNICEF and the World Bank and endorsed by the International Confederation of Midwives and FIGO recommends MVA as the procedure of choice: “The preferred method of evacuation of the uterus is by manual vacuum aspiration. Dilatation and curettage should be used only if manual vacuum aspiration is not available.” 4

A report about the history of the United Nations Children’s Fund that appeared on the website of the American Life League in 2005 documented deliberate the change in the organization’s “orientation,” shall we say, in the 1960s to serve the interests of the population controllers and, at the same, of indoctrinating innocent children in the ways of carnal gratification without having to “worry” about pregnancy and the moral “norms” that their parents might have taught them:

Until the mid 1960's UNICEF fulfilled its mission and performed a great service to many of the neediest children in the world. However, as the world and the UN began to change, more unscrupulous programs replaced these worthy works and the original mission was lost to population control euphemisms and "reproductive health issues". A recent series of articles in the British medical journal, The Lancet, on the growing number of preventable childhood deaths worldwide provide a clear indication that UNICEF needs to redirect its "emphasis [on] its traditional mission of child survival". (1)

The 1960's brought an increased life expectancy to inhabitants of third world countries. Improved medical technologies and the development of vaccines either eliminated, cured or controlled a number of diseases. Improved methods of communications and means of more rapid transportation lowered death tolls in areas struck by natural disaster. At the same time, there was a resurgence of the Malthusian theory that the world was suffering from overpopulation and was headed for doom – there was not enough food to go around. This same decade entertained the development of new methods of fertility control – the "birth control pill", the IUD and sterilization. Theories of overpopulation and the development of birth control methods combined to fuel debate on population control. Population growth was being viewed as one reason why poor people stayed poor and deprived children remained deprived. Measures for preventing or interrupting pregnancy were seen as part of "maternal and child health services". (2)

There was major controversy in the UN – so much so that the organization's structure was threatened. The World Health Organization (WHO) and UNICEF were reluctant to join in the debate. WHO was unsure about the health effects of the pill and UNICEF did not want to act before WHO. Controversy within UNICEF itself threatened to split the Executive Board in the spring of 1966. It was proposed that UNICEF funds would be spent on providing women with access to family planning in those countries where the government requested it but that UNICEF would not offer any advice nor provide supplies or equipment to make them. Opponents argued "it would be wrong for UNICEF to depart from its original mandate of saving children in order to engage in activities to prevent them from being born". (3) The proposal was withdrawn and the issue tabled for a year.

In June of 1967, the UNICEF-WHO Joint Committee on Health Policy revived the debate using a revised argument. The committee submitted a report to the board suggesting that family planning programs supported by UNICEF should be part of a wide range of health services for both mothers and their children. After all, they reasoned, birth spacing was a health service that would benefit both mother and child. The report was accepted. Despite the fact that the terms used were understood to specifically exclude contraceptives, the phrases "family planning" and UNICEF were permanently joined.

Also in 1967, UN Secretary General U Thant announced the creation of a new UN fund – the United Nations Fund for Population Activities (UNFPA), which would specifically underwrite population-control activities. The UNFPA received contributions from those nations that opted to do so. By 1970, UNICEF was receiving large grants from UNFPA and had an expanded policy in place to supply contraceptives. The cooperation between UNICEF and UNFPA grew and soon thereafter, was extended to other organizations including International Planned Parenthood Federation (IPPF).

A good deal of the controversy surrounding UNICEF comes primarily and directly from this policy of supplying and distributing contraceptives. Many contraceptives are, in reality, abortifacients. One of the effects of these contraceptives is to prevent the newly fertilized ovum, a new human life, from implanting in the mother's womb, thus destroying it. The so-called "contraceptives" that UNICEF provided were actually causing early abortions.

Despite their arguments during the World Population Conference in Bucharest in 1974 that UNICEF's interests and activities in promoting birth control were to benefit maternal and child health, the "family planning" program in Pakistan is just one example that revealed a quite different story:

Pakistan had initiated an "all-out national family planning program" in 1965. With the assistance of UNICEF, the plan aimed to provide each and every fertile couple in the country (approximately 20 million) with contraception, preferably an IUD. Doctors, health inspectors and midwives were trained to insert the device and anyone who participated received financial rewards. However, when the campaign was extended to more rural parts of the country, where no health centers (and, thus, no medical backup) was available, problems arose. Women, completely unaware of the potential dangers (acute pain, bleeding, infection), suffered serious injuries; many were rendered sterile. By 1974, when the health problems caused by IUD's became more widely known, the program ran into increasing resistance. "So much for family planning using IUD's as a benefit to women's health". (4)

The public record proves much to those willing to look and learn. The proceedings and finances of UNICEF, other UN organizations and pro-abortion groups such as IPPF are a matter of public record. Throughout the 1970's the Population Information Program published The Population Reports. These reports were in-depth scientific studies on the latest methods of fertility control and guides to governments seeking information for population programs. The Population Information Program was the responsibility of George Washington University Medical Center in Washington, D.C. until July 1, 1978 and then that of John Hopkins University in Baltimore, Maryland. These Reports clearly outline UNICEF's involvement with population control throughout that time frame. UNICEF was named as an organization assisting in the following:

April 1974 "On Oral Contraceptives" – UNICEF supplied tables and raw materials equivalent to more than five million cycles.

March 1977 "Guide to Sources of Family Planning Program Assistance" – UNICEF is listed as a source of assistance for oral contraceptives, IUD's, condoms, diaphragms, injectibles and spermicides.

September 1977 "Guide to equipment selection for sterilization procedures" – UNICEF is listed as a source of equipment assistance and instrument kits for sterilization by mini-laparotomy and by colpotomy. "Sterilization equipment may be obtained through a variety of national and international donor agencies … United Nations (UN) agencies – the United Nation's Children's Fund (UNICEF)… Of the five kits shown, two were developed by UNICEF." (5)

January 1979 "Within the U.N. System, about 80 percent of contraceptives (oral) funded by the UNFPA are purchased by UNICEF and twenty percent by WHO." (6)

May 1979 "The UNFPA is also funding the purchase of an increasing number of IUD's for developing country programs, with the actual procurement undertaken by UNICEF (about 97 percent) and WHO (about three percent)." (7)

1985: UNICEF received $700,000 from the World Bank for a population project in Kenya that included sterilization facilities in district hospitals and family planning clinics.

1987 – 1988: UNICEF cooperated in a project to organize, expand and improve the quality of sterilization in mobile units countrywide. Additionally, UNICEF budgeted almost $800,000 for the purchase of contraceptives and national child-spacing programs in Jamaica and Tanzania. (8)

In 1987 an International Conference on Better Health for Women and Children through Family Planning was held in Nairobi, Kenya under the sponsorship of UNICEF and six other organizations – UNFPA, World Bank, WHO, IPPF, the UN Development Program and The Population Council. This conference was significant for two reasons: it made clear that the UNICEF of 1987 was vastly different from the UNICEF of 1967 and, in aligning with the world's leading pro-abortion organizations, UNICEF went on record officially endorsing abortion.

In 1967 UNICEF categorically rejected any connection with contraceptives. In 1987, it joined its collaborators in endorsing a Resolution for Action that included not only contraceptive research, development, distribution and practice, but pressed for abortion – regardless of the legal status – as well as increased collaboration with agencies whose agendas included contraceptives, sterilizations and abortion – often under political coercion. One of the conference Recommendations for Action read " … legal, good quality abortion services should be made easily accessible to all women." (9)

In 1988 UNICEF published Facts of Life, a booklet promoting birth control and the use of various contraceptives. The booklet contained no mention of abstinence or natural family planning and failed to mention the abortifacient nature of contraception.

1988 – 1989: UNICEF received $5.4 million for family planning services and population control programs. UNICEF was also named as the agency to provide contraceptive supplies in Cape Verde Sweden.

1990: UNICEF contributed $1.3 million to aid in surgical contraceptive services in Malawi and $1.8 million for family planning projects in Burundi. (10)

At the opening of UNICEF's Executive Board meeting in New York on April 16, 1990, a number of member states proposed a more active campaign to support abortion. Some European countries were even proposing that UNICEF become an advocate for abortion in countries where it was illegal. Archbishop Renato Martin, Permanent Observer of the Holy See to the UN, and his staff reacted quickly drafting a letter to the Vatican that evening. The next day, Martino addressed the Board: "the Holy See views with great alarm some repeated proposals that this UN agency, established for the well being of children, become involved in the destruction of existing human life, even to the point of suggesting that UNICEF become an advocate for abortion in countries whose sovereign legislation does not allow it. The Holy See firmly opposes such proposals not only on moral grounds, but also because they would bring a totally unacceptable deviation from the stated purpose of UNICEF in favour of children". (11) The Vatican ended up withdrawing its annual contribution to UNICEF in 1996.

At its inception, the United Nations Declaration of the Rights of the Child stated, in part: "Whereas the child, by reason of his physical and mental immaturity, needs special safeguards and care, including legal protection, before as well as after birth …" In 1991, the Declaration was revised to offer state protection of a child only after birth. It remains that way today. (12)

In 1995, UNICEF came under the leadership of a new director – Carol Bellamy. Bellamy had served as a state senator in New York during the mid-1970's. She twice voted against the Aid to Live Aborted Child Act (a law which required professional medical personnel to provide the same care to infants surviving an abortion and born alive as any other premature baby) and supported other pro-abortion bills. Canada's Stephen Lewis, another pro-abortion advocate and former NDP Ontario leader, was appointed Bellamy's deputy executive director.

Throughout her tenure as director of UNICEF, a period strife with conflict in many areas of the world, Bellamy has staunchly advocated more help for refugee women who are sexually assaulted. While this may appear noble on the part of UNICEF at the surface, the advocated "help" includes provision of "morning after" pills, "reproductive health kits" bumping desperately needed medical supplies and even food from supply convoys, warehouses full of condoms but no penicillin and abortion services for children as young as ten years old. During the Balkan conflict, Albanian refugee camps received enough reproductive health kits to supply 350,000 people for six months – they were terribly short on antibiotics, but the shipment of birth control arrived! Not long after her appointment, UNICEF issued a press release announcing it would be distributing "contraceptives and drugs to terminate pregnancies" to "a million starving refugees in flight along the border between Rwanda and Zaire." (13) Bellamy was re-appointed for another five-year term in 2000.

1995: The Catholic Women's League of the Philippines won a restraining order against a two-year-old WHO and UNICEF anti-tetanus program. Two labs had found "B-hCG" sterilizing agent in the vaccine. The Filipino program had already "vaccinated" 3.4 million people – all women, mainly between the ages of twelve and 45. The hormone-laced vaccine was also discovered in Mexico, Nicaragua, Tanzania, India and Nigeria. The anti-hCG hormone cause not only sterilizations but also incurable autoimmune disorders, miscarriages and birth defects. (14)

1997: UNICEF issued its 107-page The State of the World's Children that praised China for passing legislation on child rights. These "rights" supposedly guarantee Chinese citizens the "right and obligation to receive education". No where did UNICEF's report mention, however, the considerable international attention that the unconscionable human rights abuses received just the year before: forced child labor, Chinese sweatshops (where children worked for less than one dollar per month), forced abortions and "dying rooms" in Chinese Government orphanages. (15)

In July of 1998, the United Nations officially established a new alliance of three UN social agencies – UNICEF, WHO and UNFPA – to be known as the Coordinating Committee on Health (CCH). The component agencies of the CCH were to become "full partners together", yet their alliance had little to do with health. Since the members of the CCH were full partners, each could use the other's funding with impunity. The agenda included easy access to various contraceptive pills and devices, abortion and sterilization equipment.

October 2000: UNICEF designed and assisted El Salvador's Ministries of Health and Education in distributing a 170-page sex education book to be used for training adolescents on sexuality issues including contraception, homosexuality, bisexuality, masturbation and abortion. (16)

December 2000: The Wall Street Journal revealed UNICEF's mission to discourage AIDS positive mothers from switching to infant formula. By the UN's own statistics, an estimated 3.4 million children had contracted AIDS from their mothers and died. Between 1.1 and 1.7 million of those children, mostly in Africa, were believed to have been infected with HIV through breast-feeding. Yet, while Nestle and Wyeth, the leading manufacturers of infant formula in the United States, were ready and willing to provide free formula, UNICEF adamantly refused to support their offers. (17)

July 2002: Another UNICEF-funded sex education book distributed to Latin American countries was circulated at the UN Child Summit in New York. The book encouraged children to engage in sexual activities with other minors, with homosexuals and with animals. The Spanish language book, entitled "Theoretic Elements for Working with Mothers and Pregnant Teens" included a workshop book, also produced by UNICEF, which suggested that lesbian sex was an acceptable alternative for girls. (18)

June 2003: A high-ranking official with UNICEF called for the legalization of prostitution and for UNICEF to make condoms available to "everybody, everywhere and at all times". Urban Jonsson, UNICEF Eastern and Southern African Regional Director urged that UNICEF take actions to "de-criminalize sex-work and facilitate the organization of sex-workers [since] when sex-workers are organized, they are in a stronger position to negotiate safer sex with their clients." Mr. Jonsson also stated "Abstinence is simply not a realistic option for most young people today." (19)

March 2004: The UNICEF campaign to vaccinate Nigeria's youth against polio was found to be a front for sterilizing the nation. Dr. Haruna Kaita, a pharmaceutical scientist and Dean of the Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences of Ahmadu Bello University in Zaria, took samples of the vaccine to labs in India for analysis where evidence was found of serious contamination. The vaccines contained toxic substances that have direct effects on the human reproductive system. (20)

UNICEF promotes itself and raises funds at Halloween by having children carry its donation boxes door-to-door. It is also financed in large part by U.S. purchasers of UNICEF's Christmas Cards. While contributions may help to provide food, clothing, medicine or the like, chances are they may also go toward various forms of birth control, abortion and sterilization.

Winifrede Prestwich, founding member of the Canadian political pro-life lobby Campaign for Life and author of "UNICEF: Guilty as Charged" sums it up best: "UNICEF is pro-abortion. They don't want poor children coming into the world."

The Lavender Wizard of the Occupied Vatican believes that he can obfuscate his own false religious sect’s record of recruiting effeminate and/or homosexual men into its clergy and for ignoring the fact that those so recruited pretty on seminarians and young men with impunity and without a word of “papal” rebuke as though this clerical abuse does not even exist. Thus it is that he uses the statistics provided by anti-life organizations whose leaders and policies have put children at risk worldwide for exploitation by others and has indoctrinate them into living as beasts who can satisfy the urgings at lust at any time and in any manner of their choosing.

It must be remembered in this regard, however, that Jorge Mario Bergoglio is the friend of all public officials and all organizations of world governance that support moral evils. This is because, despite his rhetoric to the contrary, the only “moral evils” he is concerned about involve “closed borders,” “income disparity,” “social inequality” and those who deny that “climate change” is a world crisis of the first order. Anyone who supports the George Soros agenda to combat these “evils” is all right in Jorge’s book, which is why he invites the merchants of death to the participate in Vatican conferences at every opportunity.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio marches in absolute lockstep with George Soros and his statist/leftist/collectivist/globalist comrades-in-arms. The man who masquerading as “Pope Francis” even has some of them serving on the “Pontifical” Academy for Life, which he has turned into an instrument to advance the “consistent ethic of life,” which now includes “climate change” and the nonexistent “rights” of foreign nationals to violate the national sovereignty of other nations by choosing to ignore their just laws regulating migrant, and the Pontifical Academy for the Sciences. Significantly, of course, the Argentine Apostate supports the Soros Foundation’s longtime project to promote “palliative care,” which is one of the reasons, apart from massive lobbying by the agents of global deathcare and insurance industries, will be very difficult for “pro-life” Catholics in the Congress of the United States of America to oppose the thoroughly anti-life Palliative Care and Hospice Education Training Act (PCHETA) that has been discussed in other commentaries on this site (see Chronicling the Adversary's Global Takeover of the Healthcare Industry and Jorge Plays Tag Team With George Soros and Comrades and an article featuring the work of two of the most vocal opponents of “hospice” and “palliative” care, hHelp Defeat PCHETA).

All right, where was I?

Oh no, I actually remember where I was.

Oy.

I was at the beginning of Jorge’s smoke and mirrors show on Sexagesima Sunday, and it is to the midst of the smoke I must return for the “vast” audience that reads these commentaries:

Rarely, in fact, do victims speak out and seek help.[2] Behind this reluctance there can be shame, confusion, fear of reprisal, various forms of guilt, distrust of institutions, forms of cultural and social conditioning, but also lack of information about services and facilities that can help. Anguish tragically leads to bitterness, even suicide, or at times to seek revenge by doing the same thing. The one thing certain is that millions of children in the world are victims of exploitation and of sexual abuse.

It would be important here to cite the overall data – in my opinion still partial – on the global level,[3] then from Europe, Asia, the Americas, Africa and Oceania, in order to give an idea of the gravity and the extent of this plague in our societies.[4] To avoid needless quibbling, I would point out from the start that the mention of specific countries is purely for the sake of citing the statistical data provided by the aforementioned reports.

The first truth that emerges from the data at hand is that those who perpetrate abuse, that is acts of physical, sexual or emotional violence, are primarily parents, relatives, husbands of child brides, coaches and teachers. Furthermore, according to the UNICEF data of 2017 regarding 28 countries throughout the world, 9 out of every 10 girls who have had forced sexual relations reveal that they were victims of someone they knew or who was close to their family.

According to official data of the American government, in the United States over 700,000 children each year are victims of acts of violence and mistreatment. According to the International Centre for Missing and Exploited Children (ICMEC), 1 out of every 10 children experiences sexual abuse. In Europe, 18 million children are victims of sexual abuse.[5]

If we take Italy as an example, the 2016 Telefono Azzurro Report states that 68.9% of abuses take place within the home of the minor.[6]

Acts of violence take place not only in the home, but also in neighbourhoods, schools, athletic facilities[7] and, sadly, also in church settings.

Research conducted in recent years on the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors also shows that the development of the web and of the communications media have contributed to a significant increase in cases of abuse and acts of violence perpetrated online. Pornography is rapidly spreading worldwide through the net. The scourge of pornography has expanded to an alarming degree, causing psychological harm and damaging relations between men and women, and between adults and children. It is a phenomenon in constant growth. Tragically, a considerable part of pornographic production has to do with minors, who are thus gravely violated in their dignity. The studies in this field - it is sad -document that it is happening in ever more horrible and violent ways, even to the point of acts of abuse against minors being commissioned and viewed live over the net.[8]

Here I would mention the World Congress held in Rome on the theme of child dignity in the digital era, as well as the first Forum of the Interfaith Alliance for Safer Communities held on the same theme in Abu Dhabi last November.

Another scourge is sexual tourism. According to 2017 data provided by the World Tourism Organization, each year 3 million people throughout the world travel in order to have sexual relations with a minor.[9] Significantly, the perpetrators of these crimes in most cases do not even realize that they are committing a criminal offence.

We are thus facing a universal problem, tragically present almost everywhere and affecting everyone. Yet we need to be clear, that while gravely affecting our societies as a whole,[10] this evil is in no way less monstrous when it takes place within the Church. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Two:

There is no need to tarry long on this as, apart from relying on the figures provided by the anti-family, anti-life, pro-impurity and indecency United Nations Children’s Fund (UNICEF), Senor Jorge was attempting blow smoke in the eyes of Catholics by making it appear that the carnal abuse of minors is not confined to his false religious sect, but this is a straw man argument as the problem of such abuse globally is the direct, long-term consequence of Protestantism’s overthrow of the Social Reign of Christ the King and the triumph of rank utilitarianism as the rotten fruit of the Judeo-Masonic anti-Incarnational, religiously indifferentist civil state of Modernity. Jorge Mario Bergoglio really believes that ordinary Catholics are fools not to recognize his verbiage for what it is, a smokescreen to avoid any reference to the fact that his false religious sect has been in the grip of the lavender collective ever since Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI walked out onto the Balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter on June 21, 1963, the Feast of Saint Aloysius Gonzaga, S.J.

All right, not that you’re any more eager than I am to return to the text of the Wizard of Obfuscation’s smoke and mirrors routine, it’s time to “move forward,” shall we say, to the next excerpt:

The brutality of this worldwide phenomenon becomes all the more grave and scandalous in the Church, for it is utterly incompatible with her moral authority and ethical credibility. Consecrated persons, chosen by God to guide souls to salvation, let themselves be dominated by their human frailty or sickness and thus become tools of Satan. In abuse, we see the hand of the evil that does not spare even the innocence of children. No explanations suffice for these abuses involving children. We need to recognize with humility and courage that we stand face to face with the mystery of evil, which strikes most violently against the most vulnerable, for they are an image of Jesus. For this reason, the Church has now become increasingly aware of the need not only to curb the gravest cases of abuse by disciplinary measures and civil and canonical processes, but also to decisively confront the phenomenon both inside and outside the Church. She feels called to combat this evil that strikes at the very heart of her mission, which is to preach the Gospel to the little ones and to protect them from ravenous wolves. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Three:

“Pope Francis” has made it clear in the past that he believes all suffering is “inexplicable” even though Holy Mother Church teaches us that suffering is the lot of man as a consequence of Original Sin and of his own Actual Sins and that it is by his patience endurance of whatever suffering the good God chooses to send him that he can make reparation for his own sins and those of the whole world. Jorge Mario Bergoglio is entirely unfamiliar, it would appear, with the theology of redemptive suffering or, perhaps more accurately, he rejects this theology altogether.

Although, to be sure, there are cases when the mystery of iniquity causes men who seek to save their souls as members of the Catholic Church to sin mortally and thus to be in peril of eternal damnation, it is also true that, for the most part, there is no mystery concerning why priests and presbyters have carnally exploited minor as it is because most of those who have done so are homosexuals whose presence in the conciliar clergy has been solicited and sustained by the conciliar hierarchy. No mystery about this matter in the slightest.

Bergoglio knows this, which is why he must ignore the issue of clerical abuse committed by his clergy who groom young men to be their accomplices in the sin of Sodom and its related vices and focus solely on the abuse of minors, which, as noted just above, has been committed principally by those who were recruited as homosexuals into the conciliar seminary system or who became groomed to be so after admission. Plain and simple.

The next section of Bergoglio’s is nothing than the use of pathos to express a sorrow for sins committed even though he has enabled those have committed them throughout the course of his wretched career as a faux bishop within a false religious sect that bills itself as the Catholic Church:

Here again I would state clearly: if in the Church there should emerge even a single case of abuse – which already in itself represents an atrocity – that case will be faced with the utmost seriousness. Brothers and Sisters: in people’s justified anger, the Church sees the reflection of the wrath of God, betrayed and insulted by these deceitful consecrated persons. The echo of the silent cry of the little ones who, instead of finding in them fathers and spiritual guides encountered tormentors, will shake hearts dulled by hypocrisy and by power. It is our duty to pay close heed to this silent, choked cry.

It is difficult to grasp the phenomenon of the sexual abuse of minors without considering power, since it is always the result of an abuse of power, an exploitation of the inferiority and vulnerability of the abused, which makes possible the manipulation of their conscience and of their psychological and physical weakness. The abuse of power is likewise present in the other forms of abuse affecting almost 85,000,000 children, forgotten by everyone: child soldiers, child prostitutes, starving children, children kidnapped and often victimized by the horrid commerce of human organs or enslaved, child victims of war, refugee children, aborted children and so many others.

Before all this cruelty, all this idolatrous sacrifice of children to the god of power, money, pride and arrogance, empirical explanations alone are not sufficient. They fail to make us grasp the breadth and depth of this tragedy. Here once again we see the limitations of a purely positivistic approach. It can provide us with a true explanation helpful for taking necessary measures, but it is incapable of giving us a meaning. Today we need both explanation and meaning. Explanation will help us greatly in the operative sphere, but will take us only halfway. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Four:

Here is the explanation, Jorge: Your own false religious sect’s recruitment of homosexuals and your own clever, truly Jesuitical efforts to make it appear as though that the Catholic Church can be favorably disposed to those who find “love” with those of the same gender. Bergoglio has sought to engineer an open, “papally”-approved and theologically rationalized “approach” on global basis to “accompanying” sodomites to legitimize all such efforts that heretofore has been made at the parish and diocesan levels as well as in most of the conciliar sect’s religious communities of men and of women.

How can I say this?

Well, because it is true and, not entirely apart from the point, others have said so, including a French sodomite, Francois Martel whose new book states from his own first-hand knowledge that Jorge Mario Bergoglio sought to “change” what he thinks is the Catholic Church’s teaching on “stable homosexual relationships” by making a distinction between the abuse of minors and the sins committed by “consenting” sodomites who are adults:

Martel presents this as the start of Francis’ denunciation of the “diseases of the Curia” and his numerous homilies on “hypocrisy” and “double lies”.

He also says the Pope at that point started to implement a “pedagogical work” aiming at making a distinction at Church level between the “crimes” of paedophilia – abuse of minors under 15 – and acts without consent or performed in within a framework of authority on the one hand, and legal homosexual activity between consulting adults, also lifting the ban on condoms.

Kasper was happy with the situation, Baldisseri is quoted as having told Martel, but “a reaction” took place that hampered the desired reforms. Martel adds that Baldisseri personally ordered the “pamphlet” titled Remaining in the Truth of Christ written by the “usual suspects” (Burke, Müller, Caffarra, Brandmüller and De Paolis) to be “seized” before it could be distributed to all the participants at the first Synod on the family.

Martel describes the Pope’s anger at the situation and his work to counter his opponents: steadily naming new cardinals in order to ensure the election of a similar-minded Pope at the next conclave and putting in motion his friends to further his agenda.

Any Catholic who is holding out furtive hope that there will be a “restoration” about Jorge Mario Bergoglio dies or decides to live in Casa Santa Marta as Antipope Emeritus II is not really thinking too clearly. Moreover, as pointed out in Remove and Replace? You Are Still Left with the Same False Church nine days ago now, none of the “conservatives” mentioned in the Lifesite News article from which the excerpt just above was taken, adhere to the Catholic Faith in its entirety as they subscribe to numerous false and condemned precepts of the “Second” Vatican Council, the “magisterial” of the postconciliar “popes,” the 1983 conciliar code of canon law and the so-called Catechism of the Catholic Church. I mean, how difficult is it—really and truly—to acknowledge the simple truth of what is contained in Paragraph Nine of Pope Leo XIII’s Satis Cognitum, June 29, 1896, that was summarized also by Pope Benedict XV in Ad Apsotolorum Beatissimi, November 1, 1914, and whose essence was summarized by Saint Robert Bellarmine very succinctly with this one sentence: Either the Faith is Had Entirely, Or It is Not Had At All ?

Jorge huffed and puffed on and on again during his post-liturgical abomination address on Sexagesima Sunday about the evil done by those who had abuse minors, but he has never used such language to call the disgusting, detestable sin of Sodom by its right name, a sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance, and he has repeatedly told homosexual and self-mutilated persons that their “decisions” to not matter to God. Thus it is in a spirit of complete revulsion that I present the next excerpt from Jorge’s post-liturgical abomination address of three days ago:

So what would be the existential “meaning” of this criminal phenomenon? In the light of its human breadth and depth, it is none other than the present-day manifestation of the spirit of evil. If we fail to take account of this dimension, we will remain far from the truth and lack real solutions.

Brothers and sisters, today we find ourselves before a manifestation of brazen, aggressive and destructive evil. Behind and within, there is the spirit of evil, which in its pride and in its arrogance considers itself the Lord of the world[11] and thinks that it has triumphed. I would like to say this to you with the authority of a brother and a father, certainly a small one and a sinner, but who is the pastor of the Church that presides in charity: in these painful cases, I see the hand of evil that does not spare even the innocence of the little ones. And this leads me to think of the example of Herod who, driven by fear of losing his power, ordered the slaughter of all the children of Bethlehem.[12] Behind this there is satan.

Just as we must take every practical measure that common sense, the sciences and society offer us, neither must we lose sight of this reality; we need to take up the spiritual means that the Lord himself teaches us: humiliation, self-accusation, prayer and penance. This is the only way to overcome the spirit of evil. It is how Jesus himself overcame it.[13]

The Church’s aim will thus be to hear, watch over, protect and care for abused, exploited and forgotten children, wherever they are. To achieve that goal, the Church must rise above the ideological disputes and journalistic practices that often exploit, for various interests, the very tragedy experienced by the little ones.

The time has come, then, to work together to eradicate this evil from the body of our humanity by adopting every necessary measure already in force on the international level and ecclesial levels. The time has come to find a correct equilibrium of all values in play and to provide uniform directives for the Church, avoiding the two extremes of a “justicialism” provoked by guilt for past errors and media pressure, and a defensiveness that fails to confront the causes and effects of these grave crimes.

In this context, I would mention the “best practices” formulated under the guidance of the World Health Organization[14] by a group of ten international bodies that developed and approved a packet of measures called INSPIRE: Seven Strategies for Ending Violence against Children.[15]

With the help of these guidelines, the work carried out in recent years by the Pontifical Commission for the Protection of Minors and the contributions made by this Meeting, the Church, in developing her legislation, will concentrate on the following aspects: (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Five:

Here we go again, relying upon the guidelines of the secular, pro-abortion, pro-sodomite, pro-“palliative” care, pro-everything bad World Health Organization to make recommendations about how to combat the clerical abuse of minors without identifying the root cause of this abuse and by blowing smoke in everyone’s faces about “listening to the children.” This man is sick, sick, sick as he really thinks that his pedantic sophistry and paternalism are going to be taken seriously by anyone except his own cadre of revolutionary agents of Antichrist who make daily war against Catholic Faith, Worship and Morals.

Insofar as “justicialism” is concerned, however, I do want to note that by this the false “pontiff” means to say that those who have committed crimes in the past should not be punished, which is why he protected Theodore Edgar McCarrick, for example, for as long as he could until “Archbishop” Carlo Maria Vigano forced his hand with the revelations about Jorge’s knowledge about McCarrick’s perverse behavior.

Jorge’s careful use of the phrase “justicialism” is meant also to invoke the specter of the late Argentine dictator Juan Peron, who used it to signify a form of social justice that balanced the rights of the community and of the individual. Bergoglio is, it would appear, signifying that he rejects efforts to punish the wicked as he believes that all that needs to be done is to follow the guidelines of a global governance organization that has helped to create, foster and sustain the abuse of children, especially by means of the sort explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that are used in formerly Catholic elementary and secondary schools and religious miseducation programs to break down a child’s natural psychological resistance to that which is impure and indecent and thus to “liberate” from “justicialism,” if you will, to using their “feelings” and “experiences” to “discover” what is “right” for them.

Short work can thus be made of the specific policy “recommendations” that Jorge Mario Bergoglio has cribbed from the World Health Organization to the utter delight of that nefarious organization’s merchants of death:

1. The protection of children. The primary goal of every measure must be to protect the little ones and prevent them from falling victim to any form of psychological and physical abuse. Consequently, a change of mentality is needed to combat a defensive and reactive approach to protecting the institution and to pursue, wholeheartedly and decisively, the good of the community by giving priority to the victims of abuse in every sense. We must keep ever before us the innocent faces of the little ones, remembering the words of the Master: “Whoever causes one of these little ones who believe in me to sin, it would be better for him to have a great millstone fastened around his neck and to be drowned in the depth of the sea. Woe to the world because of scandals! For it is necessary that scandals come, but woe to the man by whom the scandal comes! (Mt 18:6-7). (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Six:

The lady doth protest a bit too much.

A man who causes scandal to the Holy Faith almost every time he opens his mouth and who has endorsed what was forbidden by Pope Pius XI in Divini Illius Magistri, December 31, 1929, namely, explicit classroom instruction in matters pertaining to the Sixth and Ninth Commandments that, as noted before, break down the innocence of the young and predisposes them to the commission of sins of impurity at a tender age, thus conditioning them to commit such sins with moral impunity as matter of a malformed conscience in the of “expressing themselves” for the rest of their lives barring a miracle of God’s graces to effect their conversion. It is impossible to protect children from the horrors of clerical abuse if one immerses children into explicit and graphic discussions and illustrations in all that is impure, up to and including all unnatural sins of perversity that lead only to eternal perdition.

Moreover, how is it possible to “protect” children when the “pope” and his hand-chosen lavender-friendly “bishops” refuse to admit or even to discuss the simple fact that it is their own suborning of homosexuals in their clergy that has made Catholics of all age subject to abuse at the hands of men whose souls are in the grip of the devil because of the choice that they have made to surrender their great gift of priestly celibacy in order to pervert that which is forbidden them to use under any circumstances for the gratification of perverse delights?

All the talk of “protecting” children is disingenuous as this is just one of many promises that has been made in the past seventeen years, starting with the ones made by a certain conciliar “archbishop” of Washington, District of Columbia at the time, Theodore Edgar McCarrick. How sincere were those words? How effective was the “zero tolerance” policy adopted by the conciliar “bishops” of the United States of America nearly seventeen years ago?

Finally, Jorge and his band and lavender-friendly fiends are not the least concerned about protecting seminarians and other young men from falling prey to the wolves in shepherds’ clothing who seek to ply them with gifts, money and attention to groom them to become their partners, if not slaves, in perverse passions that they, the victims, might seek to coerce others into joining at some later date.

All right, let us review Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s second recommendation:

2. Impeccable seriousness. Here I would reaffirm that “the Church will spare no effort to do all that is necessary to bring to justice whosoever has committed such crimes. The Church will never seek to hush up or not take seriously any case” (Address to the Roman Curia, 21 December 2018). She is convinced that “the sins and crimes of consecrated persons are further tainted by infidelity and shame; they disfigure the countenance of the Church and undermine her credibility. The Church herself, with her faithful children, is also a victim of these acts of infidelity and these real sins of “peculation” (ibid.). (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Seven:

Will Jorge Mario Bergoglio, who protected Juan Barros and has now protected his Argentine pal Gustavo Zanchetta and has kept Battista Ricca in his position at the Institute for Religious Works (Vatican Bank) and who gave free rein to Theodore Edgar McCarrick before “Archbishop” Carlo Maria Vigano published his first “testimony” start with himself?

How about Rene Cupich or Reinhard Marx or Jaime Tagle?

Of course not, which is why Bergoglio’s mouthpiece, Francois Martel, must make it appear that conciliar “prelates” who oppose his lavender-friendly agenda are themselves homosexuals. Bergoglio loves to discredit others insidiously in order to make himself look like the champion of truth and the “little ones” when he is only the champion of heresies, errors, lies, sacrileges, blasphemies and a friend to those, whether faux clergy or the laity, who are “oriented” in the direction of eternal perdition by means of sodomy and its related vices.

The only thing serious about the efforts by Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of lavender-friendly pseudo-bishops is that they prove yet again the simple, inescapable fact that these men are serious about pretending that homosexuality is the proximate root cause of most cases of clerical abuse:

3. Genuine purification. Notwithstanding the measures already taken and the progress made in the area of preventing abuse, there is need for a constantly renewed commitment to the holiness of pastors, whose conformity to Christ the Good Shepherd is a right of the People of God. The Church thus restates “her firm resolve to pursue unstintingly a path of purification, questioning how best to protect children, to avoid these tragedies, to bring healing and restoration to the victims, and to improve the training imparted in seminaries… An effort will be made to make past mistakes opportunities for eliminating this scourge, not only from the body of the Church but also from that of society” (ibid.). The holy fear of God leads us to accuse ourselves – as individuals and as an institution – and to make up for our failures. Self-accusation is the beginning of wisdom and bound to the holy fear of God: learning how to accuse ourselves, as individuals, as institutions, as a society. For we must not fall into the trap of blaming others, which is a step towards the “alibi” that separates us from reality. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Eight:

Here is a “purification” for Jorge Mario Bergoglio: shut down the false church and surrender the offices, churches, schools, colleges, universities, professional schools, convents and monasteries purloined from the Catholic Church to those who, despite their own sins and failings, adhere to everything contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith without exception.

Alas, is well-known what kind of “purification” Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his band of uber-revolutionaries desire, namely, a complete “cleansing” of everything to do with the “Pelagian” past of the “no church” of yesteryear and permitting those who have used their power to recruit and exploit young men and seminarians to remain in power without censure whatsoever. After all, it’s the “children” that matter, not vulnerable young adults who can, Bergoglio, believes, withstand he advances of clerical groomers who have targeted them because they have a preternatural sense of who is vulnerable to their wicked and perverse charms.

Let’s roll the videotape to the next of Jorge's "recommendations":

4. Formation. In other words, requiring criteria for the selection and training of candidates to the priesthood that are not simply negative, concerned above all with excluding problematic personalities, but also positive, providing a balanced process of formation for suitable candidates, fostering holiness and the virtue of chastity. Saint Paul VI, in his encyclical Sacerdotalis Caelibatus, wrote that “the life of the celibate priest, which engages the whole man so totally and so sensitively, excludes those of insufficient physical, psychic and moral qualifications. Nor should anyone pretend that grace supplies for the defects of nature in such a man” (No. 64). (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Nine:

Well, we have it from Jorge’s own lips, do we not.

He rejects a formation of candidates for the conciliar presbyterate that are simply “negative” and “concerned about all with excluding problematic personalities.” By this, you see, Bergoglio does not mean homosexuals. Not at all. Bergoglio is saying here that it is the “rigid” and the “conservative” who are the truly “problematic personalities,” which is why it is not accident at all that Francois Martel’s book filled with innuendos about “conservative” faux bishops in the conciliar structures is being published now.

Yes, it could very well be that some of the “conservative” “bishops” named in Martel’s book are indeed suspect of conducting themselves in secret as practitioners of perversity, but that does not mean their opposition to it is invalidated as truth exists independently of who accepts and proclaims it even if his own live is lived in opposition to what he knows and proclaims to be true.

The truth is that, yes, “problem” candidates for the priesthood must be excluded, which is why Father Gerald Fitzgerald, the founder of the Servants of the Paraclete, wanted to buy an island to isolate homosexual priests from every having contact with the laity ever again (see Appendix B below).

Look, there has been a long, long effort in many dioceses and religious communities under the control of the counterfeit church of conciliarism to screen in effeminate and homosexuals and to screen out men who believe in the truths of the Holy Faith and who are unafraid to speak the truth without regard to persons. I was told by a vocations director in 1974 that there were, at that time, “dioceses within 200 miles of here that accept homosexuals for the priesthood.” It was around that same time that Father Benedict Groeschel, O.F.M. Cap., told a group of seminarians that there was an infestation of homosexuals in the priesthood that will explode into scandal one day and shake the faith of many.” (Sadly, Father Benedict seemed to have forgotten what he said as he defended the “bishops” in 2002 when the scandals actually broke into full public view after being the subject of reports for about fifteen years previously in such disparate outlets as The Wanderer and the National Catholic Reporter.)

Formation?

Seminarians in many places within the conciliar structures have been formed to root out their masculinity and rigidity and form them in soft, effeminate, “loving,” “tender” ways that condition them to be “flexible” in all things pertaining to Catholic Faith, Worship and Morals and to use the heretical moral theology of proportionalism (which contends that the preponderance of extenuating circumstances and the motives of an individual can either mitigate his culpability for committing an action that is inherently sinful or actually make the action, objectively evil in itself, to be licit, if not mandatory, to undertake) in the confessional and when providing spiritual direction.

Oh yeah, the conciliar revolutionaries have done quite an effective job at deforming men to be “sensitive” to “individual circumstances” and to be very good to themselves by living soft lives that having nothing to do with the penances and voluntary acts of self-denial that one whose immortal soul is conformed to the Priesthood and Victimhood of the Chief Priest and Victim of every Mass, Christ the King, should have the inherent, priestly desire to undertake out of love for the gratuitous, unmerited gift that has been given to him to be an alter Christus.

Let me remind of what my late seminary professor of dogmatic theology, Father John Joseph Sullivan, told us in class one day at Holy Apostles Seminary in Cromwell, Connecticut, over thirty-five years ago now):

Look, I don’t want to find any of you gorillas gawking at other gorillas. If I even suspect that you like gorillas and want to have long hugs with them, I am going to boot your butt out of here. There is no place in this man’s priesthood for effeminacy, the effeminate and queers. None. Do I make myself clear?

A priest is to receive his support from the One to whom his immortal soul is conformed at his ordination. Men who act like girls and expect other men to act like girls are unfit for Holy Orders, and any of you who think otherwise better get out of here before I find out. In my day at The Rock [Saint Bernard’s Seminary in Rochester, New York, in the late-1930], two seminarians found in the same room with the door closed were expelled without questioning. Prima facie proof of sodomy. No questions asked. Guess what? I am still in favor of that rule.

That’s formation, which is not what the seminary process has been about in most places within the conciliar structures, where the stress has been on malleability, flexibility, “compassion, “adaptability” and the willingness to be a “listener” as part of the “parish ministry team” rather than a “dictator” who believes that his putative ordination gives him a sacerdotal dignity that carries with the responsibility of leadership without having to answer to lay boards for his preaching and commitment to the immutable truths of the Holy Faith.

Ready for the next “recommendation”?

I am not. However, duty calls:

5. Strengthening and reviewing guidelines by Episcopal Conferences. In other words, reaffirming the need for bishops to be united in the application of parameters that serve as rules and not simply indications. Rules, not simply indications. No abuse should ever be covered up (as was often the case in the past) or not taken sufficiently seriously, since the covering up of abuses favours the spread of evil and adds a further level of scandal. Also and in particular, developing new and effective approaches for prevention in all institutions and in every sphere of ecclesial activity. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Ten:

This is perhaps the most galling “recommendation” of them all.

The list of conciliar “bishops” who have been guilty of homosexual abuse, whether of children or adults, is very long. One conciliar “episcopal conference” after another around the world has closed ranks behind their own after he has been accused of abusing his office. This was true with Joseph Bernardin when he was accused by Stephen Cook in 1995. This was true with Daniel Leo Ryan in 1996 when Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., which has resumed its work of ferreting out the abusers in multiple dioceses despite promises of “a relationship” from at least one conciliar “cardinal,” Francis George, O.M.I., in 1997, and threats from lawyers for dioceses and their insurance companies. The conciliar “bishops” did not like have the light shone upon them by Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., twenty years ago, and they are not going to like it now despite Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s meaningless promises of “strengthening and reviewing “guidelines” by “episcopal” conferences. Too bad.

Blase Cupich, who is under investigation by Roman Catholic Faithful regarding his role in homosexual priestly abuse (nota bene: RCF’s leaders accept the “legitimacy” of “Pope Francis” and the validity of the “bishops” in what we know to be the false conciliar sect that is cannot nor can ever be the Catholic Church), and “Archbishop” Charles Scicluna of Malta have made it clear that there will never be any effort to root out homosexuality within the ranks of the conciliar presbyterate and they even deny that the sin of Sodom has anything to do with clerical abuse:

ROME, February 22, 2019 (LifeSiteNews) — Decades of widespread homosexuality in US seminaries had “nothing to do with the sexual abuse of minors,” a key organizer of the Vatican abuse summit said on Friday.

At today’s summit press briefing, LifeSite asked Archbishop Charles Scicluna of Malta, adjunct secretary for the Congregation for the Doctrine of the Faith, and papal appointee to the summit’s organizing committee, a follow-up to a question posed yesterday by Italian journalist Sandro Magister.

Magister had asked the Maltese archbishop on Thursday why the word “homosexuality” was completely absent from the summit’s opening day — particularly in light of the fact that over 80 percent of clerical abuse victims were post-pubescent boys.

“Human conditions that we recognize, and that exist, but they aren’t something that really predisposes to sin”?

Yes, homosexuality exists because human beings choose to misuse the gift that God has given them for the continuation of the species, but that does not mean that its existence is be respected as something that is normal and thus equivalent to the fact that God made the sexes complementary to each other:

[27] And God created man to his own image: to the image of God he created him: male and female he created them. [28] And God blessed them, saying: Increase and multiply, and fill the earth, and subdue it, and rule over the fishes of the sea, and the fowls of the air, and all living creatures that move upon the earth. [29] And God said: Behold I have given you every herb bearing seed upon the earth, and all trees that have in themselves seed of their own kind, to be your meat: [30] And to all beasts of the earth, and to every fowl of the air, and to all that move upon the earth, and wherein there is life, that they may have to feed upon. And it was so done. (Genesis 1: 27-30.)

[18] And the Lord God said: It is not good for man to be alone: let us make him a help like unto himself. [19] And the Lord God having formed out of the ground all the beasts of the earth, and all the fowls of the air, brought them to Adam to see what he would call them: for whatsoever Adam called any living creature the same is its name. [20] And Adam called all the beasts by their names, and all the fowls of the air, and all the cattle of the field: but for Adam there was not found a helper like himself.

[21] Then the Lord God cast a deep sleep upon Adam: and when he was fast asleep, he took one of his ribs, and filled up flesh for it. [22] And the Lord God built the rib which he took from Adam into a woman: and brought her to Adam. [23] And Adam said: This now is bone of my bones, and flesh of my flesh; she shall be called woman, because she was taken out of man. [24] Wherefore a man shall leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife: and they shall be two in one flesh. [25] And they were both naked: to wit, Adam and his wife: and were not ashamed. (Genesis 2: 18-22.)

[1] This is the book of the generation of Adam. In the day that God created man, he made him to the likeness of God. [2] He created them male and female; and blessed them: and called their name Adam, in the day when they were created. (Genesis 5: 1-2.)

[4] Who answering, said to them: Have ye not read, that he who made man from the beginning, Made them male and female? And he said: [5] For this cause shall a man leave father and mother, and shall cleave to his wife, and they two shall be in one flesh.

[6] Therefore now they are not two, but one flesh. What therefore God hath joined together, let no man put asunder. (Matthew 19: 4-6.)

Although homosexual temptations are not sinful in se, they are unnatural and disordered, and it is altogether opposed to right reason for anyone to admit that one can base his self-identification on the basis of a propensity to be attracted unnaturally to a person of the same gender. There is no such thing as a “homosexual person,” only a human being who has chosen to believe himself to be such because of an unnatural attraction.

God has given the generative power to man to continue the species as a husband and a wife join together to die to self to form a wedded union in Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ to use the gift that is theirs in a manner befitting redeemed creatures. God has not given the generative power to man so that he can debase and pervert its use. There is no moral equivalency between the proper, chaste use of the generative powers and any kind of illicit, whether natural or unnatural, of them, and for “Archbishop” Charles Scicluna to speak so casually about these powers in a manner that makes it appear that God approves of both and has even created people to be homosexuals is a blasphemous offense against truth.

Remember, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s first instinct is to protect his friends who are accused of either being clerical abusers themselves and/of failing to act against such abusers and of simultaneously attacking those who accuse them of such behavior. The Casa Santa Marta within the Walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River is a veritable “who’s who” of his pals who have been whisked away from their posts, usually for unspecified “health reasons,” once they become the subjects of investigation into their unseemly behavior. Bergoglio does not believe that sodomy is a sin that cries out to Heaven for vengeance and he does not believe that sodomite behavior between “consenting adults” is problematic, which is why the abuse of power by “bishops” and seminary rectors to groom seminarians and young men into their lives of perversity is not being discussed at a conference that he, Bergoglio, has chosen to limit to the “protection of minors.” Men such as Jorge Mario Bergoglio, Rene Cupich, Reinhard Marx, Jaime Tagle, Joseph Tobin, James Martin, et al. believe that we cannot see the lavender elephant that is in the room with them at all times.

A final excerpt from the Lifesite News article about Charles Scicluna’s February 22, 2019. Press conference demonstrates that the conciliar authorities do not want to investigate the sodomite culture in their false religious sect nor do they desire even to acknowledge who protected the likes of Mr. Theodore Edgar McCarrick and permitted him to rise to the point of becoming an alleged member of the College of Cardinals:

Earlier this week, Archbishop Scicluna also ingeniously argued that the question of the sexual abuse of seminarians (such as in the McCarrick case) would be dealt with by not being dealt with: that through concentrating on minors at the present summit, the participants would learn valuable lessons despite never dealing with the question of seminarians and other vulnerable adults.

At the same Feb. 18 press conference, Cardinal Cupich also denied any causal connection between homosexuality or a homosexual subculture and sexual abuse, even though he doesn’t deny that 80 percent of the abuse is same-sex — and even though the most extravagant estimates say that a mere 10 percent of the population is homosexually inclined, and more recent and systematic estimates would put it at an all-time-high of only 4.5 percent.

He also placed the burden of proof on others and so by implication refused to investigate whether there is a tacit agreement among homosexual prelates to cover up such abuse.

The importance of addressing the question of coverup at all levels was pointed out at today’s summit briefing by CNN’s Delia Gallagher. Gallagher asked why Americans should trust summit organizers when the “reassuring face” of the crisis in 2002 was then-Cardinal McCarrick, who promised “zero-tolerance” when he himself was an abuser.

Cardinal Cupich said in reply that he himself “had to be held accountable” and “takes seriously” his call to discipleship, while seeking to ensure that “we are supportive of each other to live the Gospel.”

But in response to these remarks, one observer said: “No one asked him to tell us anything about his personal conduct, but about why there’s no will to investigate who knew about McCarrick’s immoral conduct and when, and still supported his promotion.”

“Without clarifying this, it is clear that there is no desire for transparency,” the observer said.

Numerous observers at today’s press briefing saw in Archbishop Scicluna’s remarks a wall of silence being raised to any discussion about how homosexuality among the hierarchy may have influenced, or might still influence, the decision of prelates not to denounce one another.

In comments directed to summit organizers, one high-ranking official who spoke on condition of anonymity said:

We have understood that you don’t want to talk about homosexuality, and the people of God have well understood why. If you say that you are in favor of transparency and clarity, your assembly should make a statement reasserting what is contained in the Catechism of the Catholic Church about the condition of homosexuality, and its condemnation of the grave sin of sodomy. In the absence of this, it’s clear that you do not want transparency and that you have lost all credibility on the part of the faithful. (Cupich and Scicluna Deny the Sodomite Subculture in Seminaries Has Anything to do With Clerical Abuse.)

Although the so-called Catechism of the Catholic Church is rife with heresy and error and makes the discredited assertion that “homosexual persons do not choose” their condition, the “high-ranking official who spoke on the condition of anonymity” was entirely correct to state the Scicluna and the other participants in the sham being conducted by sham Catholics who run a sham religious sect have lost all credibility on the part of the faithful. These men are a joke who do not even realize that the only thing about their transparency that is credible is the fact that they do not want to transparent. They want to continue protecting their own and to do anything but anything to avoid identifying the root of the clerical abuse problem, something that subject themselves to the sort of public exposure that they believe is “immoral.”

In other words, the conciliar revolutionaries take ordinary Catholics within the structures of the counterfeit church of conciliarism for fools as they continue to indemnify the lavender agenda theologically and culturally while castigating anyone who seeks to ferret them out and call them. “Pope Francis” himself did this on the eve of his sham of a conference to “protect minors” that is all about protect the conciliar officials themselves as he addressed pilgrims from the Diocese of Beneveto on Wednesday, February 20, 2019:

Good morning! So many of you have come, it seems like a canonization! Many thanks to the bishop, to the mayors, to all, thank you for this courtesy which certainly indicates a kindness of the soul, thank you.

Dear brothers and sisters, I am pleased to welcome you and to address my warm welcome to you. You have come to Rome, with your pastor Msgr. Felice Accrocca, to return the visit I had the joy of making to Pietrelcina on 17 March last year, on the occasion of the centenary of the apparition of the permanent stigmata of Saint Pio and on the fiftieth anniversary of his death.

I wish to renew to you all my sincere thanks for the warm welcome you reserved for me on that occasion. I will never forget that day, just as I will never forget the many sick people I greeted; that visit has stayed in my heart. May the memory of that event, full of ecclesial and spiritual significance, revive in each one of you the will to deepen the life of faith, following the teachings of your illustrious and holy countryman Padre Pio. He was distinguished for his steadfast faith in God, firm hope in the heavenly realities, generous dedication to the people, and fidelity to the Church, whom he always loved with all her problems and her adversities. I will pause a little on this. He loved the Church, with the many problems the Church has, with so many adversities, with so many sinners. Because the Church is holy, she is the Bride of Christ, but we, the children of the Church, are all sinners – some big ones! – but he loved the Church as she was, he did not destroy her with the tongue, as it is the fashion to do now. No! He loved her. He who loves the Church knows how to forgive, because he knows that he himself is a sinner and is in need of God’s forgiveness. He knows how to arrange things, because the Lord wants to arrange things well but always with forgiveness: one cannot live an entire life accusing, accusing, accusing the Church. Whose is the office of the accuser! The devil! And those who spend their life accusing, accusing, accusing, are – I will not say children, because the devil does not have any – but friends, cousins, relatives of the devil. And no, this is not good, flaws must be indicated so they can be corrected, but at the moment that flaws are noted, flaws are denounced, one loves the Church. Without love, that is of the devil. Saint Padre Pio had both of these things; he loved the Church with all her problems and her adversities, with the sins of her children. Do not forget this.

I encourage you to understand and always welcome God’s love, the wellspring and reason for our true joy. We are called to give this love that changes life, especially to the weakest and neediest. Each one of us, spreading divine charity, contributes to building a more just and fraternal world. Following the example of Padre Pio, please, never tire of entrusting yourselves to Christ and of announcing His goodness and his mercy with the witness of your life. It is this that the men and women of our time too expect from the Lord’s disciples. Witness. Think of Saint Francis – whom your bishop knows well – what did he say to his followers? “Go, bear witness, words are not necessary”. At times one must speak, but start out with witness, live as Christians, bearing witness that love is more beautiful than hatred, that friendship is more beautiful than enmity, that the brotherhood between us is more beautiful than war.

Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it pretty clear that “Archbishop” Carlo Maria Vigano’s criticism of his covering-up his own knowledge of Theodore Edgar McCarrick’s notorious, perverted behavior with his “nephews,” seminarians and priests/presbyters. Moreover, Jorge Mario Bergoglio condemns anyone and any organization, presumably including Roman Catholic Faithful, Inc., that dares to name names and ferret out sodomites who engage in “consenting” sins of perdition with adults.

There is, obviously, quite an irony in this as Jorge Mario Bergoglio has made it quite a point in the past 2178 days to accuse those who hold fast to the truths of the Holy Faith of being “rigid,” “Pelagian,” “Pharisees,” “fundamentalist,” “closed-in-on-themselves,” “juridical,” “mean-spirited,” “hypocritical,” “reactionaries” and of being “fossilized” people who want to “live in a museum” while they “cage the Holy Spirit.” He is a hypocrite par excellence as everything he reserves the right to denounce believing Catholics while hiding behind the cover of his own kind of victimology when he is caught protecting clerical abusers and of plotting to make sodomite behavior a matter of “accompaniment” and not of condemnation and a call to conversion.

Speaking of “accompaniment,” here is the next “recommendation” offered by the Argentine Apostate:

6. Accompaniment of those who have been abused. The evil that they have experienced leaves them with indelible wounds that also manifest themselves in resentment and a tendency to self-destruction. The Church thus has the duty to provide them with all the support they need, by availing herself of experts in this field. Listening, let me even put it this way: “wasting time” in listening. Listening heals the hurting person, and likewise heals us of our egoism, aloofness and lack of concern, of the attitude shown by the priest and the Levite in the parable of the Good Samaritan. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Eleven:

Nonsense.

Let’s give an example of how Jorge Mario Bergoglio “accompanied” the victims of “Bishop” Juan Barros when they demanded that he be removed as the conciliar “bishop” of Osorno, Chile, for his role in protecting a notorious sodomite clergyman, Father Fernando Karadima:

SANTIAGO, Chile — A number of Chilean Catholics reacted with disappointment and anger on Friday, a day after Pope Francis spoke in defense of a bishop who they say protected a pedophile priest. The remarks, made on Thursday just before Francis left Chile for Peru, upended his efforts to rehabilitate the Catholic Church’s reputation while visiting South America.

Francis told reporters Thursday there was not a shred of evidence against Bishop Juan Barros Madrid, who victims of the Rev. Fernando Karadima, Chile’s most notorious priest, have accused of being complicit in his crimes.

“The day someone brings me proof against Bishop Barros, then I will talk,” Francis said before celebrating Mass outside the northern Chilean city of Iquique. “But there is not one single piece of evidence. It is all slander. Is that clear?”

The pope’s comments set off a storm in Chile, raising questions about his commitment to repairing the damage from sexual abuse scandals and improving the decline in the church’s image and following in the traditionally devout country.

Benito Baranda, coordinator of the pope’s visit to Chile, told a radio station in Santiago that Bishop Barros “should have ceased to be bishop a long time ago.” He added: “The damage he is inflicting on the church is big.”

Mr. Baranda, a psychologist, said that the church “never believed Karadima’s victims from the start” and that the pope’s support for the bishop “reignites the feeling of not being believed, or that they are exaggerating or being deceitful. It’s like when children say they suffer abuse but no one believes them because they are children.”

However, the president of the Chilean bishops’ conference, Msgr. Santiago Silva, said the organization would “unconditionally support” the pope’s position on Bishop Barros. “The pope told us what he wants, and he wants Monsignor Barros to continue,” Monsignor Silva said.

Alejandro Goic, the bishop of Rancagua, said that what “the pope says has extraordinary value,” but he added that “the church’s main priority should be the victims.”

Anne Barrett Doyle, a co-director of BishopAccountability.org, a group that monitors abuse cases, called the pope’s remarks “a stunning setback.”

She added: “He has just turned back the clock to the darkest days of this crisis. Who knows how many victims now will decide to stay hidden, for fear they will not be believed?”

And the government’s spokeswoman, Paula Narváez, said on her Twitter account: “Respecting, believing and supporting victims of sexual abuse is an ethical imperative. No institutional defense can override this basic principle for a fair society, one that is empathetic with those who most need it.”

The pope told a group of tourists visiting Vatican City in 2015 that people in Orsono who protested the appointment were “dumb.”

“The Osorno community is suffering because it’s dumb,” he said, according to video recorded by one of the tourists. The city had “let its head be filled with what politicians say, judging a bishop without any proof.”

This week, lay and religious groups from Osorno and Santiago, the capital, protested throughout the pope’s visit and called for action against the bishop.

But Bishop Barros has continued to enjoy the support of the Vatican, and there was no public indication that Francis was reconsidering his position. Bishop Barros participated in the pope’s ceremonies in Santiago, Iquique and the southern city of Temuco. In Iquique, Bishop Barros told reporters that Francis had offered him “words of support and affection.”

The Associated Press reported this week that Francis had acknowledged the furor over the legacy of Father Karadima in a 2015 letter to the Chilean bishop’s conference. The letter said the pope proposed Bishop Barros and two other bishops go on sabbatical before taking up any new positions, a plan that ultimately fell apart.

Francis began his visit to Chile on Tuesday morning by publicly apologizing for the sexual abuse involving the clergy, saying he felt “pained and ashamed” over the “irreparable damage” done to their victims. But he refused to meet with victims of Father Karadima.

“What the pope has done today is offensive and painful, and not only against us, but against everyone seeking to end the abuses,” James Hamilton, one of the victims, said during a news conference Thursday.

The archbishop of Santiago, Francisco Javier Errázuriz, who has been harshly criticized by Father Karadima’s victims for failing to protect them or investigate their accusations at the time, said the controversy over Bishop Barros was an “invention.” (Jorge Says Critics of Barros are Slanderers.)

Gee, where have we heard this tune before?

Well, for starters, we have heard it from the lips of Jorge Mario Bergoglio himself.

Remember?

Yes, the false “pontiff” uttered the famous words, “Who am I to judge?”, when he was asked onboard the antipapal plane traveling from “World Youth Day” 2013 to Rome about the documented accusations against his own handpicked nominee, “Monsignor” Battista Ricca, to head the Institute for Religious Works, the Vatican Bank. Jorge’s then spokesflack, “Father” Federico Lombardi, S.J., had denied such proof existed, promoting Vaticanologist Sandro Magister to provide the documentation that Lombardi said did not exist (Lombardi, by the way, was the "moderator" of the recent sham conference conducted by the sham pope and his sham bishops about their sham religious sect).

Because of the documented charge that "Monsignor" Battista Ricca, whom Bergoglio/Francis himself appointed as the head of the Institute of Religious Works (the Vatican Bank) is a sodomite. Bergoglio/Francis stood by his "man" in this instance, claiming that a "preliminary investigation" showed nothing even though the facts, documented by Sandro Magister, who did a sold piece of reporting on this matter, were to the contrary. Here is just a brief review:

"To Father Lombardi, who defines as 'not trustworthy' what was published regarding Msgr. Ricca, L'Espresso replies reaffirming point by point the facts referred by Sandro Magister in his piece, confirmed by several primary sources and, as a whole, considered at the time of such gravity by the same Vatican authorities that forced them to remove the Monsignor from the Uruguay nunciature, in which he rendered his service, giving scandal to bishops,priests, religious and lay persons in that country.

"It can be added that the Vatican authorities, instead of making up improbable and ad-lib denials, could verify the trustworthiness of all that was published by L'Espresso by simply consulting the exhaustive documentation in their possession on the affair, in particular that related to his time in the Montevideo nunciature. Further documentation is available from the Uruguayan authorities, from security forces to fire brigades. Not to mention the numerous bishops, priests, religious, laymen in Uruguay who were direct witnesses of the scandal and are ready to speak." (On "Gay Lobby", Sandro Magister challenges the Vatican: "We have the evidence".)

Put into this context, therefore, what the false “Bishop of Rome” said on this issue five years, seven months ago now means that Battista Ricca is his “brother” as long as he has “good will” and “seeks God,” that he, Jorge Mario Bergoglio, has no problem with supposedly “past” sins of perversity as God forgives and forgets, requiring him to do the same.

In this, you see, Jorge Mario Bergoglio demonstrated himself to be completely sanguine about the horror of personal sin and his total openness to having "gay men" in the clergy if they “seek God” and “have good will.”

Although Bergoglio has met with Fernando Karadima’s victims while wringing his hands as they told him of how they had abused, Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s first instinct to “accompany” victims by accusing them of slander when attempting to bring the crimes of perverted clergymen to light. “Accompaniment” is just an empty, “feel good” slogan that Bergoglio adopts in various circumstances, whether to hold sob sessions with victims of clerical abuse to let them get their stories told and then to be rid of them without changing anything of substance or to reaffirm fornicators, adulterers, the self-mutilated and sodomites in their lives of unrepentant sin. The counterfeit church of conciliarism is filled with empty slogans. “Accompaniment” is just one of them.

The final two “recommendations” have nothing to do with true priestly formation as Bergoglio’s justified warnings about the dangers of the digital world and of “tourism” designed to facilitate sins of impurity do not even mention the simple Catholic truth that long before the digital world and of specific “tourist” locations catering to impurity Catholics of all ages and states-in-life were taught from the first days of catechism classes: to avoid the near occasions of sin:

7. The digital world. The protection of minors must take into account the new forms of sexual abuse and abuse of all kinds that threaten minors in the settings in which they live and through the new devices that they use. Seminarians, priests, men and women religious, pastoral agents, indeed everyone, must be aware that the digital world and the use of its devices often has a deeper effect than we may think. Here there is a need to encourage countries and authorities to apply every measure needed to contain those websites that threaten human dignity, the dignity of women and particularly that of children. Brothers and Sisters: crime does not enjoy the right to freedom. There is an absolute need to combat these abominations with utter determination, to be vigilant and to make every effort to keep the development of young people from being troubled or disrupted by an uncontrolled access to pornography, which will leave deep scars on their minds and hearts. We must ensure that young men and women, particularly seminarians and clergy, are not enslaved to addictions based on the exploitation and criminal abuse of the innocent and their pictures, and contempt for the dignity of women and of the human person. Here mention should be made of the new norms on graviora delicta approved by Pope Benedict XVI in 2010, which included as a new species of crime “the acquisition, possession or distribution by a cleric of pornographic images of minors… by whatever means or using whatever technology”. The text speaks of minors “under the age of fourteen”. We now consider that this age limit should be raised in order to expand the protection of minors and to bring out the gravity of these deeds.

8. Sexual tourism. The conduct, the way of looking at others, the very heart of Jesus’ disciples and servants must always acknowledge the image of God in each human creature, beginning with the most innocent. It is only by drawing from this radical respect for the dignity of others that we will be able to defend them from the pervasive power of violence, exploitation, abuse and corruption, and serve them in a credible way in their integral human and spiritual growth, in the encounter with others and with God. Combatting sexual tourism demands that it be outlawed, but also that the victims of this criminal phenomenon be given support and helped to be reinserted in society. The ecclesial communities are called to strengthen their pastoral care of persons exploited by sexual tourism. Among these, those who are most vulnerable and in need of particular help are certainly women, minors and children; these last however need special forms of protection and attention. Government authorities should make this a priority and act with urgency to combat the trafficking and economic exploitation of children. To this end it is important to coordinate the efforts being made at every level of society and to cooperate closely with international organizations so as to achieve a juridical framework capable of protecting children from sexual exploitation in tourism and of ensuring the legal prosecution of offenders.[16]

Allow me now to offer a heartfelt word of thanks to all those priests and consecrated persons who serve the Lord faithfully and totally, and who feel themselves dishonoured and discredited by the shameful conduct of some of their confreres. All of us – the Church, consecrated persons, the People of God, and even God himself – bear the effects of their infidelity. In the name of the whole Church, I thank the vast majority of priests who are not only faithful to their celibacy, but spend themselves in a ministry today made even more difficult by the scandals of few (but always too many) of their confreres. I also thank the faithful who are well aware of the goodness of their pastors and who continue to pray for them and to support them.

Finally, I would like to stress the important need to turn this evil into an opportunity for purification. Let us look to the example of Edith Stein – Saint Teresa Benedicta of the Cross – with the certainty that “in the darkest night, the greatest prophets and saints rise up. Still, the life-giving stream of the mystical life remains invisible. Surely, the decisive events of history of the world have been essentially influenced by souls about whom the history books remain silent. And those souls that we must thank for the decisive events in our personal lives is something that we will know only on that day when all that which is hidden will be brought to light”. The holy, faithful People of God, in its daily silence, in many forms and ways continues to demonstrate and attest with “stubborn” hope that the Lord never abandons but sustains the constant and, in so many cases, painful devotion of his children. The holy and patient, faithful People of God, borne up and enlivened by the Holy Spirit, is the best face of the prophetic Church which puts her Lord at the centre in daily giving of herself. It will be precisely this holy People of God to liberate us from the plague of clericalism, which is the fertile ground for all these disgraces.

The best results and the most effective resolution that we can offer to the victims, to the People of Holy Mother Church and to the entire world, are the commitment to personal and collective conversion, the humility of learning, listening, assisting and protecting the most vulnerable.

I make a heartfelt appeal for an all-out battle against the abuse of minors both sexually and in other areas, on the part of all authorities and individuals, for we are dealing with abominable crimes that must be erased from the face of the earth: this is demanded by all the many victims hidden in families and in the various settings of our societies. (The Wizard of Modernist Obfuscation Has Spoken.)

Comment Number Eleven:

Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a fool. Sure, this is obvious. However, it is good to point out every once in a while. So, let point it out again: Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a fool.

Among the many reasons that the false “pontiff” is a fool is that, as a naturalist, he believes in the ability of human institutions of civil governance, most of which are replete with practitioners of sins against the Sovereignty of God over the fecundity of marriage by means of contraception and who support, if not have participated in, the slaughter of the innocent preborn by surgical means and are fully supportive of the homosexual collective’s agenda. It is impossible to fight the spread and the institutionalization of widespread pornography and other incentives to sins of impurity by means merely natural. As one infected with liberalism, though, Jorge Mario Bergoglio believes that institutional structures can change human behavior and make the “world better,” “more just” and “peaceful” as efforts are undertaken to open borders, redistribute income and to take draconian, statist methods to combat “global warming” and “climate change.”

As stated just above, Jorge Mario Bergoglio is a naturalist, and that is why there is not one place in his speech or in his list of meaningless recommendations, including in the “formation” of seminarians, of the role played by Sanctifying Grace in helping men to avoid sins and to scale the heights of sanctity.Indeed, Bergoglio made no mention of sanctity.

“Pope Francis” made no mention of Eucharistic piety (not that Our Blessed Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ is actually present in the Roman Rite churches under the control of the conciliar revolutionaries, that is) nor did he make any reference to Our Lady’s Most Holy Rosary. How can men be formed to serve in persona Christi if they do not exhorted to spend time on their knees in front of Our Lord in His Real Presence and if they do not consecrate themselves to Him through the Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart of His Most Blessed Mother, making sure pray the Holy Rosary at every opportunity provided to them.

You want an antidote to “surfing” the internet?

Pray the Rosary!

You want to plan a travel of itinerary?

Go to shrines of Our Lady and pray her Most Holy Rosary!

Holy Mother Church has given us numerous ways to protect ourselves against the evil that is present even with the accidental touch of a button or that appears on the websites of mainslime newspapers and even “conservative” and not a few Catholic websites as she has given us such sacramentals of Holy Water and Blessed Salt to ward off the devils seeking to lead us in the “little,” supposedly “invisible” sins and to forget that even a momentary lapse of the custody of the eyes can lead us into committing a Mortal Sin.

The naturalist and the liberal Bergoglio can think only of naturalist “solutions” that are no solutions at all as he relies upon the efforts of governments whose policies are based in a support for the internationalization of sin that lines the pockets of campaign donors with loads of profits. It does not even occur the warped, Modernist mind of the Argentine Apostate with a dirty tongue who is a serial violator of the First and Second Commandments that two of the most effective ways to protect us from sin and its near occasion are the Brown Scapular of Our Lady of Mount Carmel and the Miraculous Medal of Grace.

As has been noted in numerous endless commentaries on this site, the advance of the sodomite agenda in the world has been made more possible because of what was for decades the overt support for it by members of the conciliar hierarchy, their chancery factotums, parish priests/presbyters, members of religious communities of men and women that has now received antipapal approbation in the past seventy-one months, fourteen days as Jorge Mario Bergoglio has done everything imaginable to give aid, comfort and “accompaniment” to those engaged in fornication, adultery and sodomy and its related vices. Amoris Laetitia, March 16, 2016, for example, was all about such “accompaniment,” and last week’s showcase sham of a conference behind the Walls of the Occupied Vatican on the West Bank of the Tiber River is simply an effort to appear to do “something” about the “protection of minors” was just another exercise in window-dressing for the masses while choose to ignore the simple fact that clerical abuse of Catholics of all ages is caused almost exclusively by the infestation of sodomites in the conciliar clergy. Nothing is ever going to change within the counterfeit church of conciliarism any entity based upon falsehoods, no less one that rejects plain articles contained in the Sacred Deposit of Faith and has corrupted what purports to be Catholic worship in to the celebration of man rather than the adoration of the Most Blessed Trinity and present itself as a community “meal” rather than the ineffable Sacrifice of the Cross offered in an unbloody manner, will worsen constantly over time despite all the “solutions” and “recommendations made by Jorge Mario Bergoglio and his own comrades or those made by “conservatives,” who accept the premises of the conciliar revolution while trying to reconcile the irreconcilable, namely, the immutable teaching of the Catholic Church before October 9, 1958, and that of her counterfeit ape that has risen since the crapulous Angelo Roncalli stepped out on the Balcony of the Basilica of Saint Peter on October 28, 1958, the Feast of Saints Simon and Jude.

As Mrs. Randy Engel, who has launched the Catholic League of Saint Peer Damian to make known the writings (see an appended excerpt from The Rite of Sodomy) of the saint whose feast was celebrated on Saturday, February 23, 2019, on which was commemorated the anticipated Vigil of Saint Matthias, noted in The Rite of Sodomy thirteen years ago, the infiltration of sodomites into the ranks of the Catholic clergy in the decades before the “Second” Vatican Council was a real phenomenon that she documented in great detail, especially as pertains to Francis Cardinal Spellman, the Archbishop of New York from 1939 to 1967. However, this infiltration became systematic during the anti-pontificate of one who afflicted with the curse of perversity, Giovanni Battista Enrico Antonio Maria Montini/Paul VI, and has resulted in whole theological, liturgical, architectural, musical and aesthetic ethos in the counterfeit church of conciliarism that is steeped in a “sensitivity” about sodomy and its related perversities. Indeed, the entire sordid story is in Mrs. Engel’s The Rite of Sodomy. The only solution to this runs through the Sorrowful and the Immaculate Heart of Mary and her Fatima Message.

We Must Let Our Lady Convert Our Hearts and Minds in These Unprecedented Times

We are but a week ago from the beginning of Lent on Ash Wednesday, March 6, 2019, which is also the Commemoration of Saints Pereptua and Felicity. Although our annual Lenten journey into the desert has not begun and the time for the formal, rigorous fasting from food and from many of the legitimate pleasures we might enjoy freely at other times of the year has not yet arrived, it is always time for a believing Catholic to reflect on his past life and to consider how much he has offended God in the past and how much his own words and deeds may have scandalized and bewildered others, perhaps even causing some to either quit the practice of the Faith altogether or to resist embracing the truth about the state of the Church Militant in this time of apostasy and betrayal because of our own sins and human imperfections.

Dom Prosper Gueranger’s reflection for Tuesday in Sexagesima week contains an exhortation to his readers to amend their lives lest events such as the ones that overtook all but eight members of Noe’s family at the time of the Deluge overtake us when we least expect and might not have given thought to the moment of our Particular Judgment or even have time to ask Our Lady to make a perfect Act of Contrition:

When we reflect upon the terrible events which happened in the first age, we are lost in astonishment at the wickedness of man, and at the effrontery wherewith he sins against his God. How was it that the dread words of God, which were spoken against our first parents in Eden, could be so soon forgotten? How could the children of Adam see their father suffering and doing such endless penance, without humbling themselves and imitating this model of repentance? How was it that the promise of a Mediator, who was to reopen the gate of heaven for them, could be believed, and yet not awaken in their souls the desire of making themselves worthy to be His ancestors, and partakes of that grand regeneration, which He was to bring to mankind? And yet, the years which followed the death of Adam were years of crime and scandal; nay, he himself lived to see one of his own children become the murderer of a brother. But why be thus surprised at the wickedness of these our first brethren? The earth is now six thousand years old in the continued reception of divine blessings and chastisements; and are men less dull of heart, less ungrateful, less rebellious towards their Maker? For the generality of men—we mean, those who deigned to believe in the fall and the chastisement of our first parents, and in the destruction of the world by the deluge—what are these great truths? Mere historical facts, which have never once inspired them with a fear of God’s justice. More favoured than these early generations of the human race, they know that the Messias has been sent, that God has come down upon the earth, that He has been made Man, that He broke Satan’s rule, that the way to heaven has been made easy by the graces embodied by the Redeemer in the Sacraments: and yet, sin reigns and triumphs in the midst of Christianity. Undoubtedly, the just are more numerous than they were in the days of Noah; but then, what riches of grace has our Redeemer poured out on our degenerate race by the ministry of His bride, the Church! Yes, there are the faithful Christians to be found upon the earth, and the number of the elect is every day being added to; but the multitude are living at enmity with God and their actions are in contradiction to their faith.

When, therefore, the Church reminds us of those times, wherein all flesh corrupted its way, she is urging us to think about our own conversion. Her motive is relating to us the history of the sins committed at the beginning of the world, is to induce us to examine our own consciences. Why, too, does she read to us those pages of sacred Writ, which so vividly, the flood-gates of heaven opening and deluging the guilty earth, if not that she would warn us against mocking that great God, who thus chastised the sins of His rebellious creatures? Last week we were called upon to consider the sad consequences of Adam’s sin, a sin which we ourselves did not commit, the effects of which lie so heavy upon us. This week we must reflect upon the sins we ourselves have committed. Though God has loaded us with favours, guided us by His light, redeemed us with His Blood, and strengthened us against all our enemies by His grace, yet have we corrupted our way, and caused our God to repent of having created us. Let us confess our wickedness, and humbly acknowledge that we ow it to the mercies of the Lord, that we have not been consumed. Dom Prosper Gueranger, O.S.B., The Liturgical Year: Volume IV: Septuagesima, p. 162-164.)

It is easy to critique Jorge Mario Bergoglio’s multiple defections from the Holy Faith as he reaffirms hardened sinners in their lives of perdition. Harder still for many Catholics is the task of a making a discipline and thorough Examen of Conscience every night before going to sleep and to consider with sobriety the debt that we owe to the God Who has such Infinite love for us and how we have grieved His Most Blessed Mother’s Sorrowful and Immaculate Heart repeatedly and, all too frequently, without any real reflection and without anything but a momentary and superficial sense of remorse.

The holy example of the saint whose feast we celebrate today, Saint Gabriel of the Sorrowful Virgin, teaches us to eschew the world and to follow the path of Our Lady’s humility as we seek to make reparation for our owns and those of the whole world as her devoted clients while meditating upon our sins have caused her, whose most Immaculate Heart beats as one with the Most Sacred Heart of Jesus, such unspeakable grief and bitter disappointed in us for throwing away the seeds of grace that were mentioned in the Gospel reading for Sexagesima Sunday:

Gabriel, born at Assisi in Umbria of a respectable family, and called Francis in memory of his seraphic fellow-townsman, showed from boyhood an excellent disposition of soul. As a youth, when studying letters at Spoleto, he seemed for a time to be allured by the empty beauty and pomp of the world. But by the gift of the merciful God, who had already called him to the perfection of a Christian life when he had fallen sick, he began to tire of the vanity of the world, and to desire immortal treasures alone. But to quicken his obedience to the call of God, it happened that as he saw the celebrated Image of the Blessed Virgin being carried with solemn pomp outside the precincts of the church of Spoleto, he experienced the flame of divine love, and at the same time decided to enter the Institute of the Clerks of the Passion of Jesus. Therefore, after overcoming no slight difficulties, he joyfully donned the somber habit in the secluded place of Morrovalle, and chose to be called Gabriel of Our Lady of Sorrows, to recall forever the memory of her joys and griefs.

In the novitiate, day by day he became conspicuous for regular observance and for the exercise of all the virtues, and in a short time he came to be considered a pattern of perfect holiness, not only by his companions and his seniors, but also beyond the confines of the monastery; he became a sweet odour in Christ in every place. An assiduous devotee of the Lord's Passion, he spent days and nights meditating upon it. He was drawn by unbelievable zeal towards the Holy Eucharist, a memorial of that Passion; and when he nourished himself with it, he burned with seraphic ardour. There was nothing more noticeable than his filial piety towards the great Mother of God. He was accustomed to pay her honour for every type of devotion, but especially to contemplate her stricken and afflicted by the sufferings of Jesus, with such sorrow that he shed floods of tears. The sorrowful Virgin was, as it were, the whole reason of his being, and the teacher of the holiness that he had acquired. As a result all his associates shared the one opinion that this servant of God had been inspired from on high so that the cult of St. Mary of Sorrows through his example might receive a great increase.

Among other virtues, he especially loved Christian humility and obedience; for he considered himself the least of all. He therefore strove eagerly to do all the most menial work of the house, and he most diligently performed, not only the direct commands, but even the unexpressed wishes of his superiors. Curbing his senses, and accustoming himself to a life of austerity, he retained unfaded the flower of his virginity, and completely crucified to the world, he lived to God alone, enjoying an intimate familiarity with his Lord. And so, at Isola in the Abruzzi, filling the short span of his life with so many noble virtues, consumed by the fire of charity rather than by disease, and refreshed by the aid of the Mother of God, his soul flew to heaven in a most peaceful journey in the year 1862, at the age of twenty-four. Then, as he had been made illustrious by God through miracles, Pope Pius X added him to the number of the Blessed in heaven. Likewise, the Supreme Pontiff Benedict XV in 1920, two hundred years after the foundation of the Institute of the Passion, on the feast of the Ascension of the Lord, decreed the honours of the Saints to the blessed youth; and Pius XI extended his Office and Mass to the Universal Church. (From Matins, The Divine Office, Feast of Saint Gabriel of the Sorrowful Virgin, February 27.)

Saint Gabriel of the Sorrowful Virgin gained Heaven at the age of twenty-four!

However, the good news for us slackers is that we can convert our lukewarm lives of tepidity and inconstancy by begging Our Lady, especially through her Most Holy Rosary, to make this coming Lent a time for genuine and lasting conversion away from bad habits and habitual Venial Sins to a life more focused on the things of Heaven and of praying with fervor as though we are to be called to make account for the stewardship of our lives at any moment. Our Lord wants us to use the graces He won of us during His Passion and Death of the wood of the Holy Cross that He sends to us through the loving hands of His Most Blessed Mother to change ourselves and to bear the crosses He sends us each day with joy and gratitude.

Such a serene resignation to the Via Crucis, the Via Dolorsa, in this time of apostasy and betrayal may very well hasten the day when a true pope will be restore miraculously to the Throne of Saint Peter and thus the fulfillment of Our Lady’s Fatima Message, by which point the likes of Jorge Mario Bergoglio and theological wrecking crew will be thought of no more and their work of destruction brought to an end.

Our true popes condemned heresy and error. They condemned moral wrong for what it is without any "nuancing" of issues.

So have our saints, including Saint Peter Damian and Pope Leo IX.

Saint Peter Damian's Book of Gommorha explained the detestable nature of the sin of Sodom, something that Mrs. Engel made clear in The Rite of Sodomy:

According to Damian, the vice of sodomy "surpasses the enormity of all others," because:

"Without fail, it brings death to the body and destruction to the soul. It pollutes the flesh, extinguishes the light of the mind, expels the Holy Spirit from the temple of the human heart, and gives entrance to the devil, the stimulator of lust. It leads to error, totally removes truth from the deluded mind ... It opens up hell and closes the gates of paradise ... It is this vice that violates temperance, slays modesty, strangles chastity, and slaughters virginity ... It defiles all things, sullies all things, pollutes all things ... This vice excludes a man from the assembled choir of the Church ... it separates the soul from God to associate it with demons. This utterly diseased queen of Sodom renders him who obeys the laws of her tyranny infamous to men and odious to God... She strips her knights of the armor of virtue, exposing them to be pierced by the spears of every vice ... She humiliates her slave in the church and condemns him in court; she defiles him in secret and dishonors him in public; she gnaws at his conscience like a worm and consumes his flesh like fire. ... this unfortunate man (he) is deprived of all moral sense, his memory fails, and the mind's vision is darkened. Unmindful of God, he also forgets his own identity. This disease erodes the foundation of faith, saps the vitality of hope, dissolves the bond of love. It makes way with justice, demolishes fortitude, removes temperance, and blunts the edge of prudence. Shall I say more?"

No, dearest St. Peter Damian, I think not.

Like every saint before him, and every saint that will ever come after him, St. Peter Damian exhorts the cleric caught in the vice of sodomy to repent and reform his life and in the words of the Blessed Apostle Paul, "Wake up from your sleep and rise from the dead, and Christ will revive (enlighten) you." (Eph 5:14) In a remarkable affirmation of the Gospel message, he warns against the ultimate sin of despairing of God's mercy and the necessity of fasting and prayer to subdue the passions:

"... beware of drowning in the depths of despondency. Your heart should beat with confidence in God's love and not grow hard and impenitent, in the face of your great crime. It is not sinners, but the wicked who should despair; it is not the magnitude of one's crime, but contempt of God that dashes one's hopes."

Then, in one of the most beautiful elocutions on the grandeur of priestly celibacy and chastity ever written, Damian reminds the wayward cleric or monk of the special place reserved in Heaven for those faithful priests and monks who have willingly forsaken all and made themselves eunuchs for Christ's sake. Their names shall be remembered forever because they have given up all for the love of God, he says.

One of the very interesting historical sidebars to Damian's treatise is that he made no preference to the popular practice of distinguishing "notorious" from "non-notorious" cases of clerical immorality--a policy which can be traced back to the 9th century and the canonical reforms on ecclesiastical and clerical discipline by the great German Benedictine scholar and Archbishop of Mainz, Blessed Maurus Magnentius Rabanus (776?-856). Under this policy, the removal of clerics found guilty of criminal acts including sodomy, depended on whether or not his offense was publicly known, or was carried out and confessed in secret.

In cases that had become "notorious," the offending cleric was defrocked and/or handed over to the secular authorities for punishment. But if his crime was known only to a few persons such as his confessor or religious superior, the offending cleric was privately reprimanded, served a penance and then was permitted to continue at his post, or transferred to a similar post in a different diocese. Given the aggressive and predatory nature of the vice of sodomy, it is highly likely that such a policy contributed to, rather than inhibited, sodomical practices among clerics and religious between the mid-800s and the early 1000s. In any case, it was unlikely that Damian, who openly expressed his condemnation of too lenient canonical regulations related to the punishment of clerical sodomites and was so judicious in preserving the integrity of the priesthood and religious life, would have approved such a policy.

Saints are realists, which is no doubt why St. Peter Damian anticipated that his "small book" which exposes and denounces homosexual practices in all ranks of the clergy including the hierarchy, would cause a great commotion in the Church. And it did.

In anticipation of harsh criticism, the holy monk puts forth his own defense as a 'whistle-blower'. He states that his would-be critics will accuse him of "being an informer and a delator of my brother's crimes," but, he says, he has no fear of either "the hatred of evil men or the tongues of detractors."

Hear, dear reader, the words of St. Peter Damian that come thundering down to us through the centuries at a time in the Church when many shepherds are silent while clerical wolves, some disguised in miters and brocade robes, devour its lambs and commit sacrilege against their own spiritual sons:

"... I would surely prefer to be thrown into the well like Joseph who informed his father of his brothers' foul crime, than to suffer the penalty of God's fury, like Eli, who saw the wickedness of his sons and remained silent. (Sam 2:4) ... Who am I, when I see this pestilential practice flourishing in the priesthood to become the murderer of another's soul by daring to repress my criticism in expectation of the reckoning of God's judgement? ... How, indeed, am I to love my neighbor as myself if I negligently allow the wound, of which I am sure he will brutally die, to fester in his heart? ... "So let no man condemn me as I argue against this deadly vice, for I seek not to dishonor, but rather to promote the advantage of my brother's well-being. "Take care not to appear partial to the delinquent while you persecute him who sets him straight. If I may be pardoned in using Moses' words, 'Whoever is for the Lord, let him stand with me.' (Ezek 32:26)"

As he draws his case against the vice of clerical sodomy to a close, St. Peter Damian pleads with another future saint, Pope Leo IX, urging the Vicar of Christ to use his office to reform and strengthen the decrees of the sacred canons with regard to the disposition of clerical sodomites including religious superiors and bishops who sexually violate their spiritual sons.

Damian asks the Holy Father to "diligently" investigate the four forms of the vice of sodomy cited at the beginning of his treatise and then provides him (Damian) with definitive answers to the following questions by which the "darkness of uncertainty" might be dispelled and an "indecisive conscience" freed from error:

1) Is one who is guilty of these crimes to be expelled irrevocably from holy orders?

2) Whether at a prelate's discretion, moreover, one might mercifully be allowed to function in office?

3) To what extent, both in respect to the methods mentioned above and to the number of lapses, is it permissible to retain a man in the dignity of ecclesiastical office?

4) Also, if one is guilty, what degree and what frequency of guilt should compel him under the circumstances to retire?

Damian closes his famous letter by asking Almighty God to use Pope Leo IX's pontificate "to utterly destroy this monstrous vice" that a prostrate Church may everywhere rise to vigorous stature." (Mrs. Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, pp. 53-55)

Does Jorge Mario Bergoglio/Francis want to destroy this monstrous vice?

By contrast, consider how Pope Leo IX responded to the report presented to him by Saint Peter Damian:

The approximate date that Damian delivered the Book of Gomorrah to Pope Leo IX is generally held to be the second half of the first year of the pontiff's reign, i.e., mid-1049, although some writers put the date as late as 1051. We do know, absolutely, that the Pope did respond to Damian's concerns, as that response in the form of a lengthy letter (JL 4311; ItPont 4.94f., no.2) is generally attached to manuscripts of the work.

Pope Leo IX opens his letter to "his beloved son in Christ, Peter the hermit," with warm salutations and a recognition of Damian's pure, upright and zealous character. He agrees with Damian that clerics, caught up in the "execrable vice" of sodomy "verily and most assuredly will have no share in his inheritance, from which by their voluptuous pleasures they have withdrawn. " Such clerics, indeed profess, if not in words, at least by the evidence of their actions, that they are not what they are thought to be," he declares.

Reiterating the category of the four forms of sodomy that Damian lists, [59] the Holy Father declares that it is proper that by "our apostolic authority" we intervene in the matter so that "all anxiety and doubt be removed from the minds of your readers".

"So let it be certain and evident to all that we are in agreement with everything your book contains, opposed as it is like water to the fire of the devil," the Pope continues. "Therefore, lest the wantonness of this foul impurity be allowed to spread unpunished, it must be repelled by proper repressive action of apostolic severity, and yet some moderation must be placed on its harshness," he states.

In light of divine mercy, the Holy Father commands, without contradiction, that those who, of their own free will, have practiced solitary or mutual masturbation or defiled themselves by interfemoral coitus, but who have not done so for any length of time, nor with many others, shall retain their status, after having "curbed their desires" and "atoned for their infamous deeds with proper repentance".

However, the Holy See removes all hope for retaining their clerical status from those who alone or with others for a long time, or even a short period with many, "have defiled themselves by either of the two kinds of filthiness which you have described, or, which is horrible to hear or speak of, have sunk to the level of anal intercourse."

He warns potential critics, that those who dare to criticize or attack the apostolic ruling stand in danger of losing their rank. And so as to make it clear to whom this warning is directed, the Pope immediately adds, "For he who does not attack vice, but deals with it lightly, is rightly judged to be guilty of his death, along with the one who dies in sin."

Pope Leo IX praises Damian for teaching by example and not mere words, and concludes his letter with the beautiful hope that when, with God's help, the monk reaches his heavenly abode, he may reap his rewards and be crowned, "Ö in a sense, with all those who were snatched by you from the snares of the devil."

Clearly, on the objective immorality of sodomical acts, both Damian and Pope Leo IX were in perfect accord with one another. However, in terms of Church discipline, the pope appears to have taken exception with Damian's appeal for the wholesale deposition of all clerics who commit sodomical acts. I say, appears, because I believe that even in the matter of punishing known clerical offenders, both men were more in agreement than not.

Certainly, Damian, who was renown for his exemplary spiritual direction of the novitiates and monks entrusted to his care, was not unaware of certain mitigating circumstances that would diminish if not totally remove the culpability of individuals charged with the crime of sodomy.

For example, as with certain clerical sex abuse cases that have come to light today involving the Society of St. John and the Legionaries of Christ, which the Holy See has yet to investigate, some novices or monks may have been forced or pressured by their superiors to commit such acts. No doubt, it is circumstances such as these that prompted Pope Leo IX to use the term, "who of his own free will" in describing a cleric guilty of sodomy. Also among the four varieties of sodomy Damian discusses in his treatise, he states that interfemoral and anal coitus are to be judged more serious than solitary or mutual masturbation.

All in all, what this writer found to be most remarkable about the pope's letter to Damian, was the absolutist position Pope Leo IX took concerning the ultimate responsibility of the offending cleric's bishop or religious superior. If the latter criticized or attacked this apostolic decree, he risked losing his rank! Prelates who fail to "attack vice, but deal lightly with it," share the guilt and sentence of the one who dies in sin, the pope declared. (Mrs. Randy Engel, The Rite of Sodomy, pp. 57-58)

Appendix B

Father Gerald Fitzgerald's Plans for Dealing with Recidivist Sodomites in the Catholic Priesthood

Father Gerald Fitzgerald, the founder of the Servants of the Paracletes, warned the Catholic bishops of the 1950s not to place predators back into any parish assignments, going so far as place a $5,000 deposit towards the purchase an island to isolate these men as he did not believe that they were capable of reforming their behavior, that the best that could be done for them was to keep them away from possible future victims as they made reparation for their sins and attempted to save their immortal souls:

As early as the mid-1950s, decades before the clergy sexual-abuse crisis broke publicly across the U.S. Catholic landscape, the founder of a religious order that dealt regularly with priest sex abusers was so convinced of their inability to change that he searched for an island to purchase with the intent of using it as a place to isolate such offenders, according to documents recently obtained by NCR.

Fr. Gerald Fitzgerald, founder of the Servants of the Paracletes, an order established in 1947 to deal with problem priests, wrote regularly to bishops in the United States and to Vatican officials, including the pope, of his opinion that many sexual abusers in the priesthood should be laicized immediately.

Fitzgerald was a prolific correspondent who wrote regularly of his frustration with and disdain for priests "who have seduced or attempted to seduce little boys or girls." His views are contained in letters and other correspondence that had previously been under court seal and were made available to NCR by a California law firm in February.

Fitzgerald's convictions appear to significantly contradict the claims of contemporary bishops that the hierarchy was unaware until recent years of the danger in shuffling priests from one parish to another and in concealing the priests' problems from those they served.

It is clear, too, in letters between Fitzgerald and a range of bishops, among bishops themselves, and between Fitzgerald and the Vatican, that the hierarchy was aware of the problem and its implications well before the problem surfaced as a national story in the mid-1980s.

Cardinal Roger Mahony of the Los Angeles archdiocese, reacting in February to a federal investigation into his handling of the crisis, said: "We have said repeatedly that ... our understanding of this problem and the way it's dealt with today evolved, and that in those years ago, decades ago, people didn't realize how serious this was, and so, rather than pulling people out of ministry directly and fully, they were moved."

Indeed, some psychology experts seemed to hold the position that priest offenders could be returned to ministry. Even the Paracletes, as the order developed and grew, employed experts who said that certain men could be returned to ministry under stringent conditions and with strict supervision.

The order itself ultimately was so inundated with lawsuits regarding priests who molested children while or after being treated at its facility in Jemez Springs, N.M., that it closed the facility in 1995.

Whatever discussion occurred during the 1970s and 1980s over proper treatment, however, for nearly two decades Fitzgerald spoke a rather consistent conviction about the dim prospects for returning sex abusers to ministry. Fitzgerald seemed to know almost from the start the danger such priests posed. He was adamant in his conviction that priests who sexually abused children (often the language of that era was more circumspect in naming the problem) should not be returned to ministry.

In a 1957 letter to an unnamed archbishop, Fitzgerald said, "These men, Your Excellency, are devils and the wrath of God is upon them and if I were a bishop I would tremble when I failed to report them to Rome for involuntary layization [sic]." The letter, addressed to "Most dear Cofounder," was apparently to Archbishop Edwin V. Byrne of Santa Fe, N.M., who was considered a cofounder of the Paraclete facility at Jemez Springs and a good friend of Fitzgerald.

Later in the same letter, in language that revealed deep passion, he wrote: "It is for this class of rattlesnake I have always wished the island retreat -- but even an island is too good for these vipers of whom the Gentle Master said it were better they had not been born -- this is an indirect way of saying damned, is it not?"

The documents were sealed at the request of the church in an earlier civil case involving Fr. Rudolph Kos of Dallas. Eleven plaintiffs won awards in the case in which Kos was accused of molesting minors over a 12-year period. He had been treated at the Paraclete facility in New Mexico. The documents were unsealed in 2007 by a court order obtained by the Beverly Hills law firm of Kiesel, Boucher & Larson, according to Anthony DeMarco, an attorney with the firm that has handled hundreds of cases for alleged victims of sexual abuse in the Los Angeles archdiocese and elsewhere.

According to Helen Zukin, another member of the firm, the documents have been used in some cases to dispute the church claim that it knew nothing about the behavior of sex abusers or the warning signs of abuse prior to the 1980s.

In a September 1952 letter to the then- bishop of Reno, Nev., Fitzgerald wrote: "I myself would be inclined to favor laicization for any priest, upon objective evidence, for tampering with the virtue of the young, my argument being, from this point onward the charity to the Mystical Body should take precedence over charity to the individual and when a man has so far fallen away from the purpose of the priesthood the very best that should be offered him is his Mass in the seclusion of a monastery. Moreover, in practice, real conversions will be found to be extremely rare. ... Hence, leaving them on duty or wandering from diocese to diocese is contributing to scandal or at least to the approximate danger of scandal." The advice was ignored and the priest was allowed to continue in ministry, and was ultimately accused of abusing numerous children, for which the church paid out huge sums in court awards.

While Fitzgerald told anyone who would listen of the futility of returning sexually abusive priests to ministry, that conviction became less absolute as the order, today headquartered in St. Louis, grew and the scope of its work became more complex. Fitzgerald, by most accounts, was deeply motivated by a sense of obligation to care for priests who were in trouble. Originally a priest of the Boston archdiocese for 12 years, he became a member of the Congregation of the Holy Cross in 1934, and started the Servants of the Paraclete in 1947. His concern at the time was primarily for priests struggling with alcoholism. As his new order matured and its ministry became known, bishops began referring priests with other maladies, particularly those who had been sexually abusive of children. The order for years was the primary source for care of priests in the United States with alcohol and sexual problems.

At times, Fitzgerald appears to have resisted taking in priests who had sexually abused youngsters. In his 1957 letter he requested concurrence from the cofounder archbishop "of what I consider a very vital decision on our part -- that for the sake of preventing scandal that might endanger the good name of Via Coeli [the name of the New Mexico facility] we will not offer hospitality to men who have seduced or attempted to seduce" children. "Experience has taught us these men are too dangerous to the children of the parish and neighborhood for us to be justified in receiving them here."

In September 1957 the bishop of Manchester, N.H., Matthew F. Brady, sought Fitzgerald's advice regarding "a problem priest," John T. Sullivan, who seemed sincerely repentant and whose difficulty "is not drink but a series of scandal-causing escapades with young girls. There is no section of the diocese in which he is not known and no pastor seems willing to accept him," Brady wrote. The "escapades" involved molestation of young girls. In at least one instance, he procured an abortion for a teenager he had impregnated. In another case, he fathered a child and provided support to the mother until she later married. The charges of molesting girls would follow him the rest of his life.

"The solution of his problem seems to be a fresh start in some diocese where he is not known. It occurred to me that you might know of some bishop who would be willing to give him that opportunity," Brady wrote in his original letter.

Fitzgerald responded that in his judgment the "repentance and amendment" in such cases "is superficial and, if not formally at least subconsciously, is motivated by a desire to be again in a position where they can continue their wonted activity. A new diocese means only green pastures."

Fitzgerald added that the Paracletes had "adopted a definite policy not to recommend to bishops men of this character, even presuming the sincerity of their conversion. We feel that the protection of our glorious priesthood will demand, in time, the establishment of a uniform code of discipline and of penalties."

He acknowledged the degree of deference with which Catholic clergy were treated even by civil authorities. "We are amazed to find how often a man who would be behind bars if he were not a priest is entrusted with the cura animarum [the care of souls]," he wrote.

Sullivan apparently had already been pulled from active ministry. In October 1957, less than a month after contacting Fitzgerald, Brady wrote a response to the bishop of Burlington, Vt., among the first of more than a dozen bishops approached by Sullivan for the next five years, warning against accepting him.

Brady then wrote a letter that he sent out time after time to bishops inquiring about Sullivan after he had requested acceptance for ministry. "My conscience will not allow me to recommend him to any bishop and I feel that every inquiring bishop should know some of the circumstances that range from parenthood, through violation of the Mann Act, attempted suicide, and abortion.

"Father Fitzgerald of Via Coeli would accept him only as a permanent guest to help save his soul but with no hope of recommending him to a bishop."

According to a 2003 Washington Post story, Sullivan, who had bounced around from diocese to diocese for nearly 30 years, "was stripped of his faculties to serve as a priest after he kissed a 13-year-old girl in Laconia, N.H., in 1983, when he was 66. He died in 1999, never having faced a criminal charge." After his death the church paid out more than a half-million dollars in awards to Sullivan's victims, including three in Grand Rapids, Mich., and one in Amarillo, Texas, two dioceses that did not heed the warnings of the bishops in New Hampshire. The victims said they were abused when they were between 7 and 12 years old.

In April 1962, Fitzgerald wrote a five-page response to a query from the Vatican's Congregation of the Holy Office about "the tremendous problem presented by the priest who through lack of priestly self-discipline has become a problem to Mother Church." One of his recommendations was for "a more distinct teaching in the last years of the seminary of the heavy penalty involved in tampering with the innocence (or even non-innocence) of little ones."

Regarding priests who have "fallen into repeated sins ... and most especially the abuse of children, we feel strongly that such unfortunate priests should be given the alternative of a retired life within the protection of monastery walls or complete laicization."

In August of the following year, he met with newly elected Pope Paul VI to inform him about his work and problems he perceived in the priesthood. His follow-up letter contained this assessment: "Personally I am not sanguine of the return of priests to active duty who have been addicted to abnormal practices, especially sins with the young. However, the needs of the church must be taken into consideration and an activation of priests who have seemingly recovered in this field may be considered but is only recommended where careful guidance and supervision is possible. Where there is indication of incorrigibility, because of the tremendous scandal given, I would most earnestly recommend total laicization."

But by 1963, Fitzgerald's powerful hold on the direction of the order was weakening. According to a 1993 affidavit by Fr. Joseph McNamara, who succeeded Fitzgerald as Servant General, the appointment of a new archbishop, James Davis, began a new era of the relationship between the order, which was a "congregation of diocesan right," and the archdiocese. Davis and Fitzgerald apparently clashed over a number of issues. Davis was far more concerned than his predecessor about the business aspects of the Santa Fe facility and demanded greater accountability. He also demanded greater involvement of medical and psychological professionals, while "Fr. Gerald [Fitzgerald] distrusted lay programs, psychologists and psychiatrists," favoring a more spiritual approach, according to McNamara.

McNamara said Fitzgerald was eventually forced from leadership by a combination of factors, not least of which was a growing disagreement with the bishop and other members of the order over the direction of the Paracletes. After 1965, said McNamara, Fitzgerald "never again resided at Via Coeli Monastery, nor did he ever regain the power he had once had."

Nor did he get his island. In 1965 Fitzgerald had put a $5,000 deposit on an island in Barbados, near Carriacou, in the Caribbean that had a total purchase price of $50,000. But the new bishop apparently wanted nothing to do with owning an island, and Fitzgerald, who died in 1969, was forced to sell his long-sought means for isolating priest sex offenders.

True bishops before the "Second" Vatican Council had been warned by Father Fitzgerald. They did not care. The seeds of corruption were planted long ago. They only managed to come to the forefront and receive liturgical expression and now even "papal" approbation in the decades thereafter.

Support Christ or Chaos

Support Christ or Chaos. We are totally dependent upon your generosity to keep this work going. I can't and won't promise you anything other than an assurance of a remembrance in our prayers before the Blessed Sacrament each day. Thank you.